Daniel McCrossan
West Tyrone · Social Democratic and Labour Party · Northern Ireland
“I thank the Member for giving way. She has raised some points of interest. Aside from the Bill at hand, the Department of Finance currently collects rates from property owners across Northern Ireland. I have found that there can be difficulties with that when properties have been lying vacant for a significant period.”
“That applies in particular to those who have been land-banking over a period of time — that happens everywhere, unfortunately — with the hope that the big cash cow will be coming and, ultimately, they will be relieved of their responsibility to maintain, look after and enhance the landscape in a town or village by spending the necessary f…”
“As is often the case when we speak in the House, it may be that some ratepayers or members of the public will take it as a given that the Bill will be the silver bullet that will resolve the dilapidation issues in towns. Depending on which area you are in, the scale is very different.”
“We need to be creative in how we can put the Bill to task. <BR /> <BR />Certainly, as I have said, it is good policy. I have no question that the Bill is well intended.”
“<BR /> <BR />Addressing dilapidation is not simply a matter for local government in isolation. The responsibility lies with the Executive as a whole. The Executive have had their eyes closed to this matter for too long, and many of our buildings have deteriorated significantly across council areas over a long period.”
“That encourages private investment, and there is natural enhancement from those investors. However, in areas that lag behind because of economic decline, underinvestment and general deprivation, many towns and cities can quickly become the poor cousin.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,822 lines we hold for Daniel McCrossan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 37.
“That is why, given where we are in the mandate — God knows what will happen in the time ahead — my party will vote the Bill down to stop this madness in its tracks.”
“I want to make progress, because I am conscious that Members want to move on. <BR /> <BR />It is important that the House recognises and acknowledges, in the strongest possible terms — not just with warm words but with actions — that we appreciate the work of our teachers across Northern Ireland. However, the Bill sends a difficult message. Clause 3 sends a warning signal that, if you dare step over the line, you are in big trouble. That is not the right message for the House to send. I do not believe that the House and two parties in particular have the right to dictate to anybody who can or cannot go on strike. If the Bill passes Second Stage, I do not have faith that it will be given the full-time consideration that is needed to fix it.”
“I will make it very clear: I do not trust those two parties with legislation. Do you know why? It is because, when we come to the end of a mandate, everything is rushed through. Look at the unintended consequences of various Acts that were passed last time, such as the Hospital Parking Charges Act 2022 and the Integrated Education Act 2022. There were others. They were rushed through without due consideration being given. I do not believe that the Bill will be given the consideration that it needs. The cost of putting it through with clause 3 fully intact is too great. It is far too dangerous for the entire teaching profession. For that reason, very clearly, categorically and absolutely, the SDLP will stand with our teachers until that clause is removed. I make that very clear to the House.”
“It could create a chilling effect within our schools. That has been articulated by teachers over the past few days. Teachers may feel afraid to challenge inspectors or to raise concerns during inspections. Staff may also worry that any disagreement with inspectors, delay or refusal could later be treated as an obstruction, with them suffering the ultimate penalty, which is far too extreme. It risks creating fear rather than professional constructive engagement. It puts a barrier between the Department, the Education Authority and, of course, our schools. Inspections should be about improvement, not intimidation.”
“Under the draft legislation, if Patsy, as my teacher colleague, were encouraging me to take industrial action, Patsy would get into trouble for having that conversation. The wording is too broad and risks catching legitimate trade union activity, workplace discussions and collective action.”
“I have respect for the Chair, and I absolutely agree. However, I am addressing the wider context of why we are here today. The terms in the Bill that I have set out could be interpreted widely. That is a dangerous place to be with legislation and, indeed, puts our teachers in a very dangerous position when it comes to their reputation and what they may be charged with and by whom. That is not clear in the Bill. <BR /> <BR />This is an interesting one. The wording "encourages someone else" is particularly concerning. Why? It is because it creates uncertainty for union representatives, workplace representatives or teachers discussing collective action. That leaves the door wide open as well. There could be considerable unintended consequences.”
“Can Laurel and Hardy behave themselves, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker? It is not that entertaining listening to them.”
“— Settle down, Nigel. Settle down — fail to cooperate —”
“Jonny, after you made that point of order, you can sit there until I am done. <BR /> <BR />Clause 3 does not simply say, "Teachers should cooperate with inspections"; it places certain conduct into the category of "unacceptable professional conduct". If that is how teachers not cooperating is described in the Bill, my God — Madam Principal Deputy Speaker, I will not stray into bad language — imagine what the public must think about the behaviour of the DUP and Sinn Féin when they went on collective strike from this place for a couple of years. On their return, the first thing that they did was resolve the pay increase for MLAs. <BR /> <BR />Clause 3 refers to teachers who impede an official, obstruct an official —”
“Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. It was a heat-of-the-moment reflection of how people feel. I am glad that Mr Buckley is so easily offended. Imagine how the teaching workforce feels. <BR /> <BR />It is important that clause 3 is seen as an attempt to weaken the form of collective action that has been protecting our teachers for many years. Teachers should not be disciplined for exercising their legitimate workers' rights, and the DUP is conflating those two issues. It is hiding behind this charade and this sham fight: the lovers' tiff between the DUP and Sinn Féin that plays out here every week and, might I add, seems to heighten coming into an election period. The reality faced by people on the ground is much more serious.”
“I will make a point, Jonny. <BR /> <BR />There is a clear reason why the teaching profession is so pissed off. Pardon my language, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker, but that is how they feel. This is not the solution.”
“The DUP is missing a key point: teachers are not on strike to avoid inspection. They are on strike because you did not pay them right and did not value them as a workforce in our schools. You mistreated them and left them without a choice. They have not been standing on picket lines for the last 10 years because they wanted to avoid inspections. Wake up. There is a clear reason —.”
“I will give way first to my friend in the corner.”
“I say to the Member who is wanting to come in that his party has presided over the Education Department for a decade. A lot of the mess that exists in the Department of Education happened under the leadership of the DUP, so will it take responsibility for that? What responsibility will the DUP take for how fed up our teachers are and how overworked and exhausted they feel? We rely on them to educate our children, but the DUP's cure is to punish them for doing their job and for having the right to stand up and say, "Things need to improve. We need to be treated better".”
“That is wide open. Teachers and unions have withdrawn cooperation from inspections as part of industrial action — we know that — but the reasons for industrial action were well made at the time: the profession was being utterly and absolutely ignored by this place and the Executive.”
“obstructs, impedes or fails to cooperate with an inspection.”
“Not yet. I am making a point. <BR /> <BR />Sensitive pupil information, SEN safeguarding and medical and staff information must also be protected. Is that information wide open to such inspections? Inspections are about improving standards; they are not about intimidating our staff. The truth is that the clause creates fear in the teaching profession. The biggest concern with clause 3 is whether it will be used — I believe that it will — against teachers who are taking part in lawful industrial action. That concern has been well rehearsed in the House today. The Bill states:”
“On the face of it, that all sounds OK. Those, however, are broad powers in legislation, and they need clear safeguards. The Minister must provide clarity on the meaning of "reasonable steps", because the wording is too loose.”
“That clause is the most serious and controversial part of the Bill, and it is the clause that we all have issue with. It states:”
“Those things are all in context, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I am getting to the point. <BR /> <BR />We can support robust inspections while also standing firmly with teachers, and that gets to the nub. The two are not mutually exclusive. To be clear, the SDLP will always support our teachers, their unions and their right to stand up for fair pay, fair conditions and the high-quality education that our young people deserve. <BR /> <BR />Let me get to the nub of the problem with the Bill. I will address clause 3, which is titled:”
“I am making progress. I will let you in shortly. <BR /> <BR />The DUP did not care about those who were dying on hospital waiting lists, and it certainly did not care about schools. If it had done, the DUP would not have walked out and prevented me from exercising my democratic right as a Member to represent the people who desperately need to be represented.”
“The people whom they had elected to remedy and resolve the problems facing the education system were not here to fix them. Things got worse. We were dealing with the aftermath of COVID and schools were trying to return to normal. What did the DUP do? It took full-blown strike action. It disappeared from the Assembly. Its Minister of Education disappeared from the pulpit and from making grand announcements and gestures. Where was the interest in safeguarding our children then? Where was the interest in our schools, our teachers and our communities? The only thing that the DUP cared about in those years was itself.”
“To be accused of unacceptable professional conduct is an extremely serious matter for any teacher. In my time in the Assembly representing schools across West Tyrone, I have yet to meet a teacher who does not give all that they have and all that they are to that important job. Such a charge could affect their career, their reputation and their ability to do the job that they love and to which they have dedicated themselves. <BR /> <BR />Teachers have spent years fighting for fair pay. When the Assembly was down from 2017 to 2020, there was large-scale industrial action, as teachers sought what they were rightfully entitled to. From 2022 to 2024, industrial action escalated. Why? It was because the people whom they had elected to this place were on strike themselves.”
“<BR /> <BR />As articulated by Members from across the House, clause 3 raises concerns. Even those who will vote to allow the Bill to progress have illustrated that they have concerns with clause 3. It gives officials broad powers during inspections and creates potential or, in some cases, definite disciplinary consequences for teachers who are deemed to have obstructed, impeded or failed to cooperate with an inspection.”
“It is important to point out that, although the debate has gone on longer than anticipated, Members are not far away from one another on this. Clause 3 presents a problem. Members are not against inspection in schools, and we all claim to support teachers, but some parts of the Bill imply otherwise. The concerns have been clearly voiced to Members of the House over the past number of days as well as, absolutely, to members of my party. The SDLP supports the highest standards in education. It always has: no question. School inspections matter. No one is arguing with that; it is a fact. Every parent deserves to have confidence that their child is receiving the best possible education. Our teachers are not the problem, however; they are the backbone of our education system.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. He has been very kind about doing so. Does the Member understand that we have not seen such a scale of industrial action in other jurisdictions because their legislators actually worked? They did not disappear for five years. That is why we have such frustration in the teaching profession, and it is time that the DUP and Sinn Féin accept that a huge amount of damage was done to the teaching profession and schools during that period.”
“I appreciate your giving way, Brooksy, but I am telling you now that the truth in this is very simple. We are not against inspections. Sinn Féin Members are not against inspections. Nobody here is against inspections. Clause 3 is wrecking the Bill because you want to criminalise our teachers, who are already buckling under pressure, are very stressed, have been underpaid for a long time, and are very frustrated with this place. That is the point that we are making. We understand the wider intention, but we do not want to punish our teachers.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. The Member will understand that there are a serious amount of potential consequences in taking forward the Bill with clause 3 intact. I am sure that the Member will appreciate that there are huge numbers of questions that have caused great concern for the teaching profession that his Minister does not seem to have any answers to. Who will be the enforcer? Who will make the decision as to what is reasonable or not in this case? You are opening yourself up to a big number of problems.”
“Thanks very much for giving way. I appreciate the Member's stating categorically on the record that there has been industrial action over the past 10 years. However, does he agree and accept that, for part of that time — five years to be precise — it was due to the absence of this place to resolve any of the issues that were frustrating teachers, including pay?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I have a good working relationship with him, but I struggle to understand Sinn Féin's position. If it has such concerns about the Bill, why did it not stop it at the Executive? Ultimately, by taking the action that Sinn Féin is taking today, it is going to stop it. The SDLP's position is very clear. We are against the Bill for a variety of reasons, but we are not against inspections. We do not trust the DUP with the Department of Education, given its 10-year track record. For Sinn Féin to come here today, with teachers listening, to say that it is genuinely concerned about the Bill when it could have stopped its introduction to begin with is a bit contradictory.”
“The Member makes a valid point, but we need to take it in the context that we are in here in Northern Ireland. It is a bit rich that the two lead parties are having a sham fight over the issue, when both of them went on strike from their place of work — here — for multiple years at great cost to the teaching profession and, indeed, our schools. Does the Member agree that that is a bit arrogant on the part of the lead government parties here?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. It is indeed a point of fact. Does the Member agree that, if Sinn Féin Members felt so strongly about this, its Ministers could surely have blocked the Bill from coming to the House at the Executive? Are we witnessing 'Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid' playing out here?”
“Minister, your Department signed off on a £125 million contract with Fujitsu for the Land and Property Services (LPS) NOVA programme. It was due to be completed before the end of last year but has missed its completion date. Can you tell us when the project will be completed? Can you guarantee that it will be completed before the end of the mandate?”
“I thank the Minister for that update. Minister, you described it as an important meeting at which a lot of progress was made. Whenever people from across our rural communities look at the continued pressures on farm incomes, the ongoing bovine TB crisis, biodiversity decline and the lack of visible outcomes on the ground, they will ask us all and specifically you, Minister, a simple question: where are the measurable results? Can you point to a single concrete outcome from the meetings or others that you have had that will improve the daily lives of farmers and people in rural communities, beyond agreeing to continue discussions and share such experiences?”
“I thank the Minister for his update. His statement praises Loughs Agency's conservation work, climate adaptation projects, scientific monitoring and international partnerships, but warm words do not pay staff or deliver important projects. Given that the agency is now carrying more responsibilities than ever, will the Minister say whether he believes that Loughs Agency is currently adequately funded? If not, how does he justify that position to the staff of Loughs Agency and the communities that see services stretched and opportunities missed because of chronic underinvestment?”
“On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. After I raised concerns earlier about Strabane Athletic Football Club, the Minister quickly rose to her feet to state in a point of order that I was incorrect. I have just read the letter that I received from the Planning Appeals Commission. It confirms that, at the end of November last year, that report was sent for the Minister's attention to the Department. I have not been inaccurate; I have reflected exactly the correspondence that was sent to me.”
“Minister, with respect, the quickest route to getting the road built is not the appeal; it is getting it right the first time. Given the repeated failures and delays and the scathing criticism of your Department by Justice McAlinden, in relation to the A5, did the Irish Government raise concerns about your shocking incompetence as Minister and about that of countless Sinn Féin Ministers when it comes to getting the road built, which would allow us to finally move on?”
“The A5 has not been delivered. Look at the state of our roads. There is a lack of investment in the north-west. The constituency that I represent is in a state, and the job situation is dire. Is it total incompetence, or does Sinn Féin not want to deliver at all? People are right to ask those questions. The people whom I represent in my community have had enough of being let down. The blame the Brits saga is over; Sinn Féin has been in power for 20 years, and it is high time that it stepped up and delivered for the people who invested their votes in it.”
“Some £500,000 of taxpayers' money was used to purchase the land, with no guarantee that there can be any development on it, given that the planning application has been stuck with the Planning Appeals Commission and on the Minister's desk; or maybe it is one rule for members of the public and another for a public body such as the Education Authority. In the interests of the people whom I represent, I sincerely hope that that is not the case. <BR /> <BR />People in Strabane are rightly asking what they are getting for giving Sinn Féin all those votes and all that power. There are three Sinn Féin MLAs, an MP and countless councillors, and, to be honest, even with all the power that they have in government, I would not depend on them to deliver a bag of chips if they had a fleet of chip vans; that is how poor it is.”
“The Minister of Education confirmed that the Education Authority is fully aware of the ongoing process faced by Strabane Athletic Football Club, that it has been subjected to considerable hurdles and that the report has been on the Minister for Infrastructure's desk since last year; that is not acceptable. The Minister needs to publish the report's findings and get on with it, instead of the dithering and delay from her ridiculously messed-up Department that does not seem to be able to deliver anything. <BR /> <BR />I was shocked that the Education Authority had moved so swiftly, given that it does not move quickly for very much.”
“The report was completed in November, and it has sat, since last year, on the desk of the Minister for Infrastructure, who has not responded to the questions that I have asked about when it will be published, even though officials from the Minister's Department have responded to various questions about that from the media. <BR /> <BR />It is a real point of concern for people, because the land has sat in limbo for eight years. Last week, I revealed that, shockingly, the Education Authority has swooped in overnight and purchased the land with the application pending on it.”
“I rise to echo the frustration and anger shared by countless constituents of mine in Strabane. The Strabane Athletic Football Club has worked tirelessly over a number of years to develop its new football stadium in Strabane. The club has gone through the various processes and tried to jump the hurdles that have been put in front of it. The planning application has been stuck with delay after delay after delay for eight years. It was passed unanimously by Derry City and Strabane District Council planning committee. It ultimately ended up with the Minister and was then referred to the Planning Appeals Commission (PAC).”
“Minister, there is no question that it is an important Bill, but it has been subject to considerable delays in your Department. It is six months late going to the Executive, for instance. It now seems to have been stuck with the Executive for the past two weeks. It is an extensive Bill that gives parental leave and carer's leave, ends zero-hours contracts and deals with employee representation. Minister, are you serious about the legislation? Why is it taking so long to get it to the next stage? Is this simply another bluff by Sinn Féin?”
“Minister, that shows that you do not have a grasp of the issue that I raised. There are farmers who cannot get storage sheds built, lagoons going or anaerobic digestion (AD) plant issues sorted. People experience huge setbacks from your Department when they even try to get a site approved in order to build a house. The truth is that you do not seem to have a handle on your Department. Everything seems to move at a snail's pace. Do you accept that that is unacceptable and that you really need to get on the ball and sort out the situation?”
“I share the frustrations of Mrs Dodds and others in the House. In fact, this area unites the House in frustration. In response to questions for written answer from me in February, your Department stated that 364 consultations had exceeded the statutory consultation deadline. This May, that figure stands at 459. Things seem to be getting worse. When will you get a grip on the issue, show some leadership and get it sorted? It is creating huge frustration for my constituents.”
“We are on the same page as Sinn Féin about the direction of travel for this place, but the SDLP's way is different, as we will persuade people and bring them along. We are not sticking up billboards saying, "Let's have a border poll tomorrow. We want a united Ireland". It is about sitting down, having a meaningful conversation and creating a pathway and a clear policy direction on the key issues that Mr Tennyson raised, such as the health service, pensions or schools.”
“I will not. You are not taking a position on anything right now, so I will not let you in either. <BR /> <BR />Mini Nigel in the corner has the DUP shaken, but God help the TUV if Reform were to start to run in Northern Ireland; it would be wiped out. <BR /> <BR />I remind the DUP — it will not like to be reminded of this — that, in 2017, it had 10 MPs. It is down to five; it is losing seats. People are turning away from the DUP's continually regurgitated nonsense about how this place is working and delivering; it is not. People are worse off today than they have ever been. That is down to you guys and your bedfellows in government, Sinn Féin. <BR /> <BR />It is an important debate.”
“You need to choose which direction you are going in. The truth is that the Alliance Party is irrelevant in the debate; it is not engaging in one of the most important conversations of our time. My firm opinion is that our people across the island, whether Catholic, Protestant, unionist, nationalist or whatever, would be much better off in a new Ireland. There are clear ways —.”
“I will tell you what they are talking about, Mr Buckley: they are talking about how useless the DUP and Sinn Féin are in government, about how useless their Ministers are when it comes to delivering on anything and about how they cram in legislation at the end of a mandate so that they look as though they are doing something meaningful, only to reverse after an election, should it be on car parking charges or anything else. The truth is that you two in government are the greatest advert for why we need change, why we need to move to a new Ireland and why we need to get away from the orange-and-green chaos of distraction. You can deliver absolutely nothing. <BR /> <BR />The Alliance amendment is not surprising but very disappointing. Trying to drive up the middle of the road without hitting something is a big risk.”
“The UK is a disastrous mess. If you look at waiting lists, the state of our schools, the state of our roads or the state of Northern Ireland, you see that there is no delivery for people on the ground. If that is not the fault of the British Government, maybe the DUP needs to look closer to home: at how it has presided over this place for almost 20 years in government with Sinn Féin and delivered little. In fact, things have got much worse. <BR /> <BR />Mr Buckley said that people are not talking about the constitutional question. He might be right in that they are not talking about it daily, but they are certainly challenging where we are today, because this place is not working.”