Danny Kennedy
Newry and Armagh · Ulster Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“<BR /> <BR />I know the circumstances that we are in, but my hope is that departmental officials will continue to explore these issues and find solutions so that, at the earliest point, those solutions can be delivered to my constituency and to the people who have such frustration with the lack of service.”
“This situation is also prevalent in other rural areas of Northern Ireland. People in areas such as Lissummon, Ballygorman, Cladymilltown, Altnamackan, Loughgall, Mullaghglass and countless others, unfortunately, all of which are located in my constituency, find themselves in a position currently where they are provided with little or no e…”
“I, with others, receive regular contact from my constituents on this issue. It is abundantly clear from the representations that I receive that the lack of broadband provision, particularly in rural areas, impacts in many ways on families and businesses that reside in various locations across the constituency.”
“Madam Principal Deputy Speaker, I thank you and the Business Committee for affording me the opportunity to debate the issue of broadband provision directly relating to my constituency of Newry and Armagh. I also place on record my good wishes to you as you leave the House, and I wish you well for the future.”
“The lack of high-quality broadband, for instance, has an impact on the ability of many rural businesses to function efficiently, placing them clearly at a disadvantage to other competitors in their particular field.”
“I could continue to detail many more circumstances, but I want other Members to contribute and to hear what the Minister has to say. I take this opportunity to make an impassioned plea to the Minister to pursue, within a quick time frame, the network improvements that are so clearly required.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,097 lines we hold for Danny Kennedy, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 21 of 22.
“The only course of action that was available to me was to cut back the use of external contractors. I will continue to bid in the remaining monitoring rounds, and I will continue to remind Executive colleagues of the impacts that these cutbacks are having.”
“I have indicated that the cutbacks for the savings that we have had to make have principally had to be directed against the use of external contractors. Of course, that does not come without impact on those businesses and indeed those employees. These are not decisions that I have taken lightly or that I would want to have made but, at the time, almost halfway through the financial year, these cuts were imposed. Frankly, it is bonkers that any Department should be asked to effect savings of this nature at that point in time. It highlights the fundamental flaw in the way in which budgets are arranged and confirmed, as well as the issues that have compounded that, ie the controversies over welfare reform. All these issues are in play. I found myself having to deal with a situation.”
“I think that we would be better to plan at the earlier stage for the amounts that we should and are entitled to receive. That would give us more value for money and more bang for our buck. I am glad that, now that he is out of office, the former Finance Minister recognises that.”
“I am grateful to the Member for his supplementary question. I am slightly curious in that, in the not-too-recent past, he was Finance Minister and operated the system that I have inherited and have tried to make best use of. The Member was not in the House for the debate on the financial position, particularly the pressures on my resource budget, which took place this morning. We had 10 contributions in all, all of them — with the exception of one, that of Mr Beggs — critical, but no one provided ideas or alternative solutions. Indeed, had he been here, he would have heard my assertion that I do not believe that that is the way to do business with the Budget generally or specifically for regional development and road and transport issues.”
“Therefore, any additional requirement is a combination of what is required to allow my operations and maintenance staff to operate efficiently plus what is required to pay external contractors.”
“The value of my Department's resource contracts for roads maintenance that are dependent on additional resources being allocated is some £12·5 million. The following activities will be affected: footway and carriageway patching; grass cutting and environmental maintenance; gully emptying; repair of street lighting outages; road marking maintenance and renewal; and traffic sign maintenance and replacement. <BR /> <BR />When bidding in October, a deduction has to be made for the value of work that could be delivered within the available time. The value of the February 2015 bid will largely be dependent on the outcome of October monitoring making further allowances for what could be delivered by the year's end. Roads maintenance works are undertaken by external contractors and my Department's operations and maintenance staff.”
“I am grateful to the Member. I know that he is a keen cyclist. I think that he has been newly appointed to the Committee for Regional Development, and I look forward to a positive contribution in relation to all those issues. I want to emphasise my desire for a cycling revolution as we go forward. Yes, there are short-term funding issues that we need to be aware of, but on the wider aspects of it and our wider ambitions, we should not lose sight of where we want to go to improve the infrastructure, new and existing, and to encourage more sustainable modes of transport that will enable people to feel safe as they cycle, or, indeed, as they walk through our urban areas, but also our rural areas.”
“I thank the Member for his supplementary question. I think he makes an important point. My ambition is such that I want to see improvement to the overall existing infrastructure. It is not simply a matter of planning with new schemes. I think the existing infrastructure is quite weak in many ways. The cycling lobby — if you like — continues to make representations, which I am very sympathetic to. Of course, those issues are not without cost, and it is important that I feel that I have the political support going forward in securing much-needed finance for schemes of that nature.”
“I am grateful to the Member for his supplementary. This relates to my response to the previous question. There is that potential for cross-border projects, such as the Newry to Dundalk project and, in County Armagh, the project along the Ulster Canal. My Department is working with various Departments and district councils to explore the opportunities for EU funding. <BR /> <BR />It is early days in this process, but I am hopeful that we will be able to secure funding for sustainable transport projects, including walking and cycling projects. Officials continue to work with colleagues in Scotland and the Republic of Ireland to secure funding for cycling infrastructure, including greenways and the Waterside hub in Londonderry.”
“I am grateful to the Member for his supplementary. We are looking at areas where we can learn from each other or compare schemes. That level of cooperation, and the potential for it, are there. I have not yet had an opportunity to discuss this at ministerial level with my new counterpart, but I think that there are areas where shared information would be of use. I am hopeful that we can make progress on that.”
“On 27 August, I published the draft bicycle strategy for Northern Ireland for a 12-week period of public consultation. An ongoing series of public consultation events will end in the middle of November and includes a number of events in rural areas. <BR /> <BR />My strategy recognises that there are differences between using a bicycle in an urban area and a rural area. It clearly states that we will continue to make provision for the bicycle in rural areas where opportunities arise, especially where there is demand. <BR /> <BR />Once the bicycle strategy is finalised, a delivery plan will be prepared. This plan will be subject to a rural-proofing exercise to ensure that the needs of rural communities and areas are considered as part of the policy development process. I look forward to the Member's response to the consultation.”
“At no stage did I regard these as soft-touch cuts; they are not. They are the inevitable consequence of the financial position that I have been placed in as a result, not only of June monitoring but of the overall economic situation, including the issue of welfare reform.”
“Will the Member give way? This is important.”
“— the criticisms of and the impact of welfare reform. <BR /> <BR />These are the facts that I have had to deal with. This is the real world of DRD.”
“Two parties in the Chamber today conveniently ignore the impact that that is having, not only on my budget but on Executive budgets generally. <BR /> <BR />There were other contributions. I thank Mr Beggs for reminding us that the monitoring process and how we conduct our Budget is a matter that needs review and urgent change. Whilst I can welcome outcomes from monitoring periods, as I have done in the past, I see that there is an underlying and fundamental problem with the way we shape our budgets. <BR /> <BR />Mr McCarthy talked about the impact in his area. He thanked everybody, except me, because apparently I did not invite him to some photo opportunity, which the Alliance Party so much enjoys. I thank George Robinson for his sympathy, if not his vote. Mr Ó hOisín, again, refused to take on board —”
“I listened carefully to the presentations made by the 10 Members who spoke. Mr Dallat, who opened the debate, reminded us of what the Romans did for us and of the Emperor Claudius. I am more reminded of Julius Caesar — it is not quite Shakespeare — and "Infamy, infamy, they've all got it in for me" from the Carry On film. <BR /> <BR />These decisions have not been taken lightly. They are important decisions, and I realise the impact they have on small firms, many of them struggling to get contracts. Options were narrowed down, given the time limit available to me. Mr Clarke thinks that we were going for soft touches. I have explained through this statement the essentials that we had to and sought to protect and where we have to go to find realistic savings. There is also the issue of welfare reform.”
“No option remained other than to put our external contractors on pause for general road maintenance and the repair of street lights that fail unless they pose an electrical hazard to the public. In taking those measures to manage a 4·4% reduction, I have sought to minimise the risks to public safety and the economy. None of the decisions that I have had to take has been of my own making or desire. None of the decisions has been taken lightly or without the forensic examination of all the options.”
“No. I have to make progress. It is time to listen. <BR /> <BR />I have protected operations and maintenance supplies.”
“I have protected street lighting inspection, testing and emergency repairs, winter services to ensure roads are gritted this winter and operations —”
“That includes £40 million to meet public-private partnership (PPP) contractual commitments; almost £12 million for energy costs for street lighting and traffic signals; £10 million for parking enforcement, charged car parking services and Strangford ferry services; £5 million for the maintenance of traffic signals; £19·2 million for the management and maintenance of road drainage infrastructure; £4·5 million to meet public liability obligations; £1 million for the new street lighting carbon reduction commitment; over £4 million for fuel and fleet maintenance; £2 million for essential tools and supplies; and over £2 million to meet unavoidable charges from other public bodies. Limited options remain available to me to realise a further £7 million of budget reductions. Do not tell me that I have not looked forensically at the issues.”
“I have done that through a range of measures including robust vacancy management, a reduction in temporary workers and applying downward pressure to overtime. I have also identified further measures to release £3·1 million, including funding that was previously held for Translink and public transport authority funding. <BR /> <BR />The steps that I have outlined have provided almost £8 million of funding towards the baseline reductions. No area of my Department has been beyond scrutiny. I have looked carefully at the running costs that are necessary to manage, maintain and develop our road network. Of the £125 million of funding available to me to meet annual running costs, over £100 million is contractually or otherwise committed. It cannot therefore be cut in-year.”
“Translink is not some piggy bank to shake when we are short. I have stretched Translink. There is not a cosy relationship between the Department and Translink, but its accounts must reflect a going concern over any three-year period. I again make no apology for protecting over £9 million of grant funding for rural transport, transport for the disabled and the Rathlin ferry. <BR /> <BR />I have looked carefully at my Department's admin budget, the majority of which relates to staff salaries. Reductions in permanent staff numbers cannot be achieved quickly or without significant investment by the Executive in a Northern Ireland Civil Service-wide scheme, but I have made reductions of £2·5 million in admin funding.”
“No. I have to make progress. <BR /> <BR />Rail services in the UK and the Republic of Ireland would not be possible without a running costs subsidy from government. Locally, the subsidy has been gradually reducing with passenger growth. I have further reduced it by £1 million. In the light of the baseline reductions that I have faced, I have further reduced the fuel duty rebate to Translink by £1·3 million. Those reductions in funding mean that, this year, the company is required to work to an increased deficit of over £9 million funded from its reserves. <BR /> <BR />I have to say that there has been much interest in and quite a lot of ignorance of the reserves held by Translink. Translink is no different from any private company: it must maintain a level of cash in order to meet its working requirements.”
“By the end of the Budget 2011-15 period, NIW will have delivered over £35 million of public expenditure savings. <BR /> <BR />Let me say that I also make no apology for my strong support of the concessionary fares scheme. This year, the scheme cost £9 million more than its central allocation. It is more expensive because it is so popular. I have to say that the concessionary fares should never have been forced to be the subject of monitoring bids; they should be fully funded by the Executive. They should not be politicised by some simply to put pressure on an Ulster Unionist Minister. Our older citizens deserve better than that.”
“Over the last three years I have been working to deliver savings, not least with Northern Ireland Water.”
“Those are resource accounting and budgeting restrictions that all Ministers have to operate under. I am simply unable to use capital funding to meet the running costs of repairing potholes and street lighting. Of course, that is of little comfort to the public, who may understandably ask how capital projects can continue but the running costs of maintaining our infrastructure cannot. <BR /> <BR />Unlike others, I have sought to manage my budget. To meet the 2·1% running costs reduction applied at June monitoring and in preparation for a 2·3% reduction at October monitoring, I conducted a robust forensic analysis. At the start of the year my Department’s running cost baseline was deliberately underfunded by the Executive at just over £344 million. Expenditure in 2013-14 was £381 million, making DRD again reliant on monitoring.”
“<BR /> <BR />Having commenced the year with a significant shortfall in funding, I submitted bids of £48·4 million resource and £130·3 million capital in June. Those are additional sums that could and, in my view, should have been spent on regional development this year. With only £5 million resource being allocated for concessionary fares and £26·3 million for a range of capital projects, huge pressures still remain. <BR /> <BR />Importantly, capital allocations cannot be used for resource purposes. I have to continue to stress that, because there seems to be either an ignorance or an unwillingness to face that fact. Capital allocations cannot be used for resource purposes and will not allow me to reinstate roads and street lighting maintenance activities.”
“I call it the mop because we are often asked to clean up other Departments’ messes. When they fail to spend and money is returned, the Department of Finance calls on DRD. The absence of opportunity to bid for returned funding is a huge problem for my Department, which has been deliberately underfunded by the centre to provide the rest of the Executive with cover and to prevent money being returned to Westminster. With funding certainty, better value for money could be achieved; for example, by allowing more resurfacing work to be done in the summer months. <BR /> <BR />A fundamental realignment of Executive budgets is therefore necessary. However, that can be achieved only through a mature debate that considers the relative priorities of all Departments. That has still not taken place, and, for me, that is unacceptable.”
“<BR /> <BR />For the person at home, June monitoring felt like being told halfway through your usual monthly spend that you had to give part of your salary back and just do your best with the bills. It is not a sensible way to operate. It would understandably provoke anger, knowing that you could have coped better had you been told at the beginning of the month, but it makes you even angrier when you know that it could have been spread over a much longer period. The way that DFP and the Executive handled June monitoring is making cuts deeper than they need to be. It made cuts take place in areas that might have been better protected had we been given proper notice. <BR /> <BR />The second problem is more specifically related to my Department, often referred to as the valve Department or, as I refer to it sometimes, the mop Department.”
“Likewise in a Department, for example, internal redundancies may be made as opposed to pausing work issued to contractors. Both save money, but one comes with an upfront cost that must be planned for and must be paid for. <BR /> <BR />To date, roads maintenance, grass cutting, gully emptying and street lighting repairs were sensibly undertaken by a mixture of internal and external staff. I deliberately retained a mixed economy, but June monitoring called time on that option. We need to remember that the savings asked of Ministers and Departments could and should have been spread over the four-year period to provide more money for the likes of health.”
“<BR /> <BR />I absolutely assure the sponsors of this motion and others that I have already looked forensically at my budget. That is nothing new — I have been looking at it forensically as an ongoing process since I took office, and there are a number of real problems with the approach adopted by the Executive when they considered June monitoring at the end of July. <BR />The first problem is that the savings requested were not on proper notice; that meant that we did not have proper time to prepare. It therefore limited the options available to Ministers and Departments. <BR /> <BR />I remind the House that some savings actually cost. We might all like the most fuel-efficient boilers for our homes, but they come at an upfront cost, with our savings being made through reduced bills over a number of years.”
“I do not want the public to receive a lesser service, but that was the inevitable consequence of the June monitoring cuts — something, of course, that I did not vote for. <BR /> <BR />As I say, people at home well understand the need to budget. These have been difficult years for many, with real pressures on household budgets. The public know that you must pay your compulsory bills first: your rent or mortgage, your heating and your electric. Some people save on the areas where they can. Maybe they no longer can afford satellite or cable TV, maybe make fewer phone calls, buy fewer clothes or even buy more basic food. Government is no different. There are areas in which we simply cannot make savings and areas in which we can.”
“Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, I thank you for chairing what has been an interesting debate. I listened carefully to 10 Members. I want to say at the outset that people at home, I think, will perhaps have a greater understanding and see clearly the reasons why I have made decisions. I will outline, as part of this presentation, why I and my party will be opposing this motion. <BR /> <BR />People will understand clearly that you cannot spend what you do not have. As a result of the June monitoring exercise — which concluded, as we know, at the end of July, and that in itself speaks volumes — I no longer have, and therefore I can no longer spend. It gives me no pleasure to see contractors put on pause, and it does not please me to see the implications for employees and their families.”
“Ours is, "No thanks, we cannot be trusted with greater responsibility". The message does not reflect well on the Executive, the Assembly or our political class. In short, we need a new Budget and a new approach.”
“Indeed, I sometimes wondered if we were listening to Sammy Wilson or Sergeant Wilson from 'Dad's Army' earlier, because pretending that everything is OK is not the answer here. It is nothing short of embarrassing for regional government in Northern Ireland following the very welcome no vote in Scotland. The Scots are seeking greater responsibility, and the Welsh are pitching for more powers. Yet, the message from our part of the world is a different take on "No thanks".”
“The Executive placed huge pressure on services across a number of Departments, mine included, with 2·1% cuts and notice of 2·3% cuts in October. Just as it would be foolish for the Executive to demand further resource cuts to DRD that would cause winter services to be reduced or stopped, it would be incredibly foolish to create a large central contingency pot for next year's Budget that asks Departments that are currently stretched on the resource side to be stretched even further. <BR /> <BR />It is time, therefore, for our local Administration to show maturity. The public will not be impressed with the Punch and Judy shows, which we have even experienced in this debate today.”
“No one, surely, would argue that such an approach is sensible, but for far too long in local politics — it is mirrored in the Assembly and in this debate, for those listening closely — the loudest voice has won the day, not the soundest argument. <BR /> <BR />That said, we are where we are. Let me indicate that I will continue to contribute to the discussion and participate constructively in the decision-making process going forward. We need to address the services we value most, those we wish to protect most and where we are prepared collectively to make reductions. That requires looking across the board at all Departments and all departmental priorities. June monitoring, as we have already heard, was resolved on the last day of July. That says much in itself.”
“I thank the Member for his contribution. Let me say that that is the wider problem that needs to be addressed. It needs to be addressed urgently, not only by the Assembly but indeed by the Executive. Difficult and hard choices have to be arrived at and cannot be ignored. What we as a party did not argue for is that, in the final six months of a four-year term, the Executive would take a large knife and slice one third of the spend areas with all these cuts. With the exemptions for Health and Education, right or wrong, the cuts in other Departments have been three times as large as they otherwise might have been, yet all of that could have been managed much more easily over a longer period. We did not argue for triple-level in-year cuts to be squeezed into an eight-month period.”
“This party, the Ulster Unionist Party, has accepted the argument and has consistently made the argument that health should have more money, both in the last Budget and in this one.”
“The absence of agreement around welfare reform may have compounded the problem, but it is not the sole cause. I believe that the issues are now of such magnitude that trying to resolve problems in one area through monitoring rounds simply serves to create problems and issues elsewhere. Those issues matter because they impact on the daily lives of the people whom we serve. For me, health matters. It is one of the chief reasons why I did not vote against the June monitoring proposals, unlike the Alliance Party, because I accept the argument.”
“I welcome the debate, which is sponsored by the Ulster Unionist Party and led by my party leader, Mike Nesbitt. I also welcome the attendance of Minister Hamilton. He will have heard what I have to say before, as matters have been raised in correspondence and at the Executive, but, still and all, it is important that they are said in the context of this debate. <BR /> <BR />It is clear that, whether you are inside or outside the Executive, we need a new Budget and that moving forward to a better planned and better balanced Budget is essential. Our current financial crisis cannot be swatted away as a little local difficulty. It is a crisis, and it is largely down to poor financial planning at the centre of government here in Northern Ireland.”
“I am grateful to the Member for giving way. He well knows the background to the issue of the money for Belfast harbour. That was an Executive decision to take out money — £20 million per year in terms of Belfast harbour — and there were voodoo economics behind it. There was no provision, rationale or legal basis for doing so. The Member is being disingenuous in the House with the information that he has provided.”
“I am grateful to the Member for giving way. Perhaps, will she then explain why, as part of the June monitoring discussions that concluded at the end of July, her party around the Executive table voted no.”
“There has been involvement in the past by Lisburn Borough Council. If that is considered to be positive, perhaps we can explore further opportunities with that as well. <BR /> <BR />I am afraid that we are in a situation where there are no outcomes at this stage. However, I think that the Adjournment debate is an important facility whereby the issues are at least aired. We have been able to set out what has happened hitherto, and we also need to look forward to see whether we can resolve those issues as quickly and as speedily as possible.”
“I assure Members that my Department will continue to liaise with the Department of the Environment’s planning division and the developers to seek to progress the delivery of improvements to the road network as part of the development in order to discharge the planning conditions. <BR /> <BR />You have heard that another meeting is due to take place on Tuesday 16 September between my Department, the Department of the Environment planning division and, indeed, the sponsor of this debate, Mr Givan. I hope that we can make progress at that point and as we go into the future. <BR /> <BR />These are complex issues that need to be resolved. On my behalf and on behalf of DRD, we want to engage positively with that. We welcome the contribution of both the elected representatives and, potentially, other interested parties.”
“<BR /> <BR />As Members indicated, no resolution has been reached to date on the improvement of the junctions under the original outline planning application. My Department’s position is that improvements at the junction previously mentioned should be built to the Transport NI design standards, as, obviously, that is in the interests of public safety. <BR /> <BR />Recently, my officials carried out a review of the history of this application and have also reviewed new drawings that Hoy Dorman consultants forwarded in May this year. That was to establish what the main differences were between design drawings as presented by the developer and the Transport NI standards for junction design. This is, as we heard, a matter of ongoing discussion and correspondence between my Department and the Department of the Environment's planning division.”
“An uplift of 550 units proved to be the maximum additional allowable, and that would have required significant improvements to 11 junctions in the area, including the junction in question, Knockmore Road/Prince William Road. My Department requested a revised transport assessment for the whole of the 110-acre LD1 development, and that identified a requirement for additional improvement works over and above those set out in the original article 40 agreement. The costs of those junction improvements were estimated to be between £15 million and £18 million. However, no resolution was reached on a new article 40 agreement, and the developer withdrew the uplift application in January 2014.”
“Those junctions are Knockmore/Prince William Road; Knockmore Road/Ballinderry Road; and Prince William Road/Ballymacash Road. <BR /> <BR />Subsequent to outline planning approval being granted, each developer submitted an article 28 planning application seeking an uplift to vary the planning condition for the maximum number of dwellings permitted from 1,800 to 2,900. An article 28 agreement is a legal agreement under article 28 of the Planning Order 1991 that enables the Department of the Environment to permit a change of conditions in a planning approval. As sufficient progress was not being made, my Department offered refusal reasons in October 2009. <BR /> <BR />In 2010, RPS consultants submitted a further analysis based on a 550-unit uplift and a 700-unit uplift.”
“As Members will know, an article 40 agreement is a legal agreement under article 40 of the Planning Order 1991 that enables the Department of the Environment to facilitate, regulate or restrict the development of land and may be used to achieve monetary contributions or transportation provision. It cannot be appealed. <BR /> <BR />A transport assessment that was included in the outline planning application identified the need for a number of junction improvements on the existing road network to ensure that there was sufficient capacity for the predicted flows arising from the development. Those were set out in an article 40 planning agreement and conditioned under the outline application, which asked for a number of junction improvements in association with the phasing of the development.”
“The site consists of approximately 45 hectares and is located between Glenavy Road and Ballinderry Road, just to the north-west of Lisburn city. The final concept master plan was issued in February 2003 and requires the development of the LD1 site to be undertaken in accordance with the general principles in it. <BR /> <BR />Three development consortia were originally involved: the Carvill Group; Antrim Construction; and Dingles and O’Kane and Devine. In 2003, two of the three developers in the site signed a planning agreement to ensure that road improvements would be carried out at various stages of the housing development. Outline planning approval was granted in September 2006, subject to an article 40 agreement, for two of the three consortia of developers for a total of 1,800 houses.”