Kellie Armstrong
Strangford · Alliance Party · Northern Ireland
“I welcome the opportunity to speak in support of the Fisheries, Aquaculture and Water Environment Bill. It is timely and important. Miss McIlveen, a fellow MLA for the Strangford constituency, has just spoken.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Bill reflects the realities of the post-Brexit landscape by aligning protections here with those in other UK jurisdictions and the UK Fisheries Act. That consistency is important for standards, enforcement and international confidence in our products.”
“Last year, I met the Department and we discussed that. The opportunities for seaweed farming in Strangford lough are wonderful, and the opportunities from seaweed that Queen's University has identified are incredible. We are lucky to have those opportunities on our doorstep, as long as there is licensing and it is properly looked after.”
“Moving beyond managing individual fisheries, the Bill recognises the interconnected nature of our rivers, loughs and seas — an approach that is very much in line with Alliance's commitment to evidence-based environmental policy. The inclusion of a national benefit objective is also significant.”
“A while ago, we saw that commercial bottom trawling had all but decimated the horse mussel population in Strangford lough. It has since been changed to a special area of conservation. That limits a lot of activity in the lough, which is not a bad thing considering that horse mussels are coming back.”
“They allow for timely action on lower-level offences without over-burdening the courts while still acting as a meaningful deterrent. If only everybody were acting properly, we would not need to have those deterrents, but we are where we are, and the Bill hopes to improve upon that.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,635 lines we hold for Kellie Armstrong, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 50 of 53.
“I will not speak too long on this because many people before me have confirmed what we already know: that, unfortunately, Housing Executive homes that are of quite an age are in such poor repair that we are letting down our community. Poor insulation causes health issues; it creates social stigma and leaves people angry and alone, often coming to us politicians as a last-chance option. <BR /> <BR />I was fortunate to go along to a beautiful development in Comber where I saw at first hand the type of energy-efficient home that I would love our community to live in. The energy-efficient solutions that were put into those homes meant that those people would be able to heat them for as little as £5 a month.”
“I thank the Minister very much for his answers so far. Does his analysis take into account the fact that integrated schools in the area are regularly oversubscribed, which means that parental demand for integrated education is not being met?”
“As the Minister knows, I come from the constituency with the longest coastline in Northern Ireland. What assurances can he give that coastal management will be dealt with and that my community and constituency will not be ignored again when it comes to winter flooding caused by coastal erosion?”
“I thank the Member very much for giving way. He talks about the good work that Mrs Foster has done as First Minister. I would expect no less of her than doing her job, however, if she had done her job as Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Investment, she should have seen the difference between the GB scheme and the Northern Ireland scheme. If you are over the jot and tittle, that is exactly what happens. That does not seem to have been the case. Does the Member accept that?”
“Thank you very much. I take us back to a comment that was made earlier by Mr Dunne, who said that there was no proper management in place and no management review by DETI. The Minister at that time in DETI was Arlene Foster.”
“Minister, 20% of attendance at out-of-hours surgeries is for routine, repeat prescriptions. No matter what we do to inform the public that the service should not be used for that, it is still happening. The main reason for that is that no one can get near a GP surgery for love nor money. I heard you talk about supporting GPs, but what are you going to do to make absolutely certain that the public can access GP services?”
“The Minister has, in recent days, rightly raised concerns about the costs of RHI, which could reach £500 million over a 20-year contract period, but he seems less concerned that the cost of division is around £800 million a year. Will he outline how he intends to reduce that cost?”
“I commend the Minister. Tonight, I am attending a social media workshop for parents with the PSNI at Strangford Integrated College, so the question is very timely. Given that many social media organisations have offices on the island of Ireland, how is he involving them in his programme?”
“Minister, as you said, a number of people across Northern Ireland do not have access to fixed-line broadband. There is an upcoming auction by Ofcom of mobile spectrum. Is there anything you can do ensure that there will be an equitable distribution of spectrum to ensure a genuine choice of provider for rural dwellers?”
“Does the Member agree that the community and voluntary sector signed up to the concordat agreement with government for sustainable and constant funding, not one-off pots that give the communities that you are talking about small glimmers of hope that are taken away when the funding disappears?”
“I thank the Minister for his recognition that these services require specialist expertise and knowledge from providers. What commitment can he give to repeat revenue support for these organisations rather than short-term, frustrating funding?”
“Does the Minister agree that an independent, well-funded agency could respond in a more timely manner to such consultations?”
“Does the Member hope, like me, that, in protecting the Human Rights Act, the First Minister will raise the issue of human rights in China during her visit there this week?”
“The fact that we have already heard that Northern Ireland Water will be paid to the end of this mandate means that there will be no changes on this, and we will still continue to have cuts in services while we flush water and money down the toilet.”
“That gave the green light to say, "Well, there'll be no discussion; there'll be nothing there on water charging". We are protecting the rich while the most vulnerable suffer from a lack of access to services. It ensures that the most wealthy in society are protected from paying water charges, even though they can afford to, while the most vulnerable face a more difficult future. I believe that those who can afford to pay should. Every single person in the House can afford to pay, but we are protecting them by not bringing forward an open and transparent debate on water charging. Taking away water meters means that we are not even going to measure leakages in the system. <BR /> <BR />This is a poorly considered motion. It is populist and short-sighted.”
“<BR /> <BR />All of us in the House have talked about the lack of money available for hospital waiting lists, for life-extending drugs for people with cancer, and for children with special educational needs, which means that those children cannot access services through schools. The money that is being spent out of our block grant from Westminster on water is the very money that we should be using to pay for those essential services. <BR /> <BR />I heard Mr McCrossan talking about underprivileged families being scared of water charges. That was brought up a year ago; the then Regional Development Minister said:”
“As has been outlined, there was only statutory consultation, and there were three respondents. The motion does not allow people to have a clear understanding of the impact that this will have. We have heard that water meters will no longer be installed in new domestic properties at a saving of about £140,000 a year to Northern Ireland Water and that that will come out of its budget. However, Northern Ireland Water said that the only reason it is installing meters is to use them to identify leakages in the system in domestic properties. Has that stopped? Are there no more leakages? How much money are we putting down the drains because of leakages? That is not being considered.”
“It will come as no surprise that I am against the motion, as is my party. When the issue was debated almost exactly a year ago, the then DUP Regional Development Minister stated:”
“What consideration has the plan given to extra sitting days rather than later sittings when business is heavy, given the impact that it has on those of us with childcare issues?”
“Given the fact that we have businesses that have in excess of 1,000 or 1,500 devices being used on the Internet with superfast broadband, what does the Commission consider to be the impact of low Internet connectivity speeds on sitting days on the ability of Members to research for debates?”
“Minister, I know you have already mentioned the specialist domestic violence listings in Londonderry court, but can you give any idea on when progress for similar listings in other courts will take place?”
“Doing so would harm people who have striven to buy their own home and who are taking benefit of the discount. <BR /> <BR />I ask the Chamber to support the amendment, and I ask the Minister to consider the timescales. Will he comment on the contents of the review and how that can go forward? That would give us something to tell people —”
“We need to grow our housing stock; we need to sort out the problem of empty and derelict homes; and we need extra housing to deal with the growing waiting lists. That needs to be suitable housing, including pensioners' houses and houses suitable for people with disabilities. <BR /> <BR />I do not want to have to continue having a feeling of powerlessness when a constituent comes to me in my Newtownards office for help in finding a house. All I can tell them is how long the waiting list is. It is a feeling that I am sure everyone in the Chamber has had, and we do not want that to continue. That is why we need to review and reform: to create a system that builds for every need in the Northern Irish community. We must give this great thought and consideration. We should have a review, not go for an immediate suspension.”
“We need to have a review and look at the whole system. It is not just the houses that were sold off; it is the houses that are sitting derelict and wasted. <BR /> <BR />Christopher Salford was correct when he talked about permanence and security. That is all that people want. My dad lives in a Housing Executive house. We moved into it when I was about a year and a half. I will not give my age away, but he has been there for quite a number of decades. He will not be moving out any time soon. People live in homes, and they want that security and permanence. <BR /> <BR />I am not saying that the house sales scheme is perfect. I am saying that there is an issue with it, and we need to look at a review. We need to consider what the difficulties are.”
“Sometimes, I feel for people who bought those houses, but they were built many, many years ago. <BR /> <BR />Andy Allen, I could not agree with you more: the scheme is not the problem. Our problem is that we do not have enough suitable housing. You are absolutely right about that. However, we need to review the house sales scheme because there is a bit of a problem with it. <BR /> <BR />Michelle Gildernew talked about rural areas. There are a number of derelict homes in the rural area of my Strangford constituency, which, if fixed and put back into circulation, would take away some of the problems that I see regularly when people come to me — people who have to rent from the private sector and then have to go for food bank vouchers at the end of the month because they cannot afford to eat.”
“As I said, that would let down people in the scheme, and it would have a very negative impact on families who are in the process. It would take away their opportunities. <BR /> <BR />Jonathan Bell spoke about different bits and pieces and talked about a review, but we need to look at the long-term impact. What is the long-term impact? If there is the potential for another 9,600 houses to be built, and the homes that have already been sold are out of the system, what will the impact be? I think that everybody in the Chamber has said that we need new houses, that we need more houses and that we need more suitable houses. Believe me: some three-bedroom Housing Executive houses would not be fit to go on sale today. I see the damp; I see the damage; I see the maintenance needed.”
“She thought that there was the potential that she would be asked to move out, so she bought her home. That is one of the benefits of the scheme. <BR /> <BR />I do not think that we should suspend the house sales scheme until a review has been completed. I heard what some on the DUP Benches said, and the Minister talked about reviews happening. If the reviews are happening, let us see the outcomes, Minister. That means that we should not suspend the scheme until we see those outcomes. It is perfectly reasonable to do that, and then you could support the motion — I am smiling. <BR /> <BR />The point of the review would be to assess whether a suspension of the scheme would be wise. It may not be wise. The scheme is in operation. It cannot simply be suspended.”
“It will come as no surprise that I urge the Chamber to support the amendment. Looking at the motion and the amendment, you see that the amendment flips the motion on its head. Doing the review first means that you can establish whether we should suspend the scheme. One of the things that I have to ask is this: what about the people who are currently in the process? If we suspend the scheme, we take their opportunity away from them. I speak personally and as a rural dweller, and I have listened to others talk about being in a rural area. I know one lady who bought her home after her children had left and her husband had died, because she was terrified that she, as a single woman living on her own in a rural area, would lose her home to a family.”
“I thank the Minister very much for mentioning coastal erosion. Does the Minister intend to introduce legislation to create a framework for managing and reducing coastal erosion and flooding?”
“How does the Minister envisage that the review 'Health and Wellbeing 2026: Delivering Together', which is currently being consulted on, will take account of the needs of those who are in the palliative stage of their cancer?”
“Minister, earlier in Question Time, you provided a slight indication about the review of individual funding requests. I am asking for a bit more detail. You mentioned it will, potentially, be rolled out in 2016-17. Are we talking about the start of the financial year from April? As you are well aware, some of the people who are on the list are waiting the outcomes —”
“<BR /> <BR />What we could do here is take the best of the reform programme utilised by our colleagues in Westminster, where the reform effectively reduced the number of bodies and enabled mergers where duplication and overlap occurred. Some were asked to improve functions in order to meet challenging and changing needs, and others were simply retained. The Public Bodies Act 2011 ensured that a framework was enshrined, ensuring that a fair and transparent process was followed. That is key here. We need that consistent approach. We may need to streamline the number of arm's-length bodies, as long as it is a positive and proactive change, but that can only happen if there is a clear, open, consistent and impartial process.”
“<BR /> <BR />Having reviewed the guidance on reviews of public bodies provided by the Cabinet Office, as was mentioned by Mr Attwood, we should follow the first principles approach to whether each function is needed, is still being delivered, is carried out effectively by the organisation and contributes to the core business of the organisation, the sponsor Department and the government as a whole. It must have respect to devolved arrangements, and we must, of course, consider if the function is provided in order to meet reserved matters. As noted in that report, we must also consider the extent to which the public body's functions are delivered in an environment currently directly affected by EU regulations or processes, and how the body will deal with the impact of Brexit has to be part of the review.”
“If a review finds that arm's-length bodies are no longer needed, the rationale for reaching that decision must be based on factual evidence that the service is no longer required and not just on saving money — I was glad to hear Mr Logan say that the intention of the motion was not just to save money — or bringing services back inside core Departments. <BR /> <BR />If rationalisation occurs, there may not be the savings that the original motion envisaged. Rationalisation should be considered only if services are no longer necessary or are being duplicated. Rationalisation can create the benefit of better service delivery and could enable effective mergers and improve the general process of good financial management. We have heard that for many years in the community and voluntary sector, have we not?”
“We should give credit where credit is due and ensure that sustainable funding is provided to allow them to go forward, but, where there is a failure of service delivery, we need to take proactive action to reduce and remove any unnecessary expenditure. <BR /> <BR />In 2010, my colleague Stephen Farry confirmed that there absolutely was a role for arm's-length bodies between Departments and the community. Many arm's-length bodies deliver services and functions that are best served outside government, and that was recognised in 2012 by the former First Minister Peter Robinson.”
“I find myself in an unusual situation where I can accept absolutely the amendment and the motion. Reading the detail of both, if only they were together, we would have something structured that we could take forward. <BR /> <BR />There needs to be a review of the performance, range and number of arm's-length bodies. If that review identifies duplication of service, of course, there should be positive action to ensure efficiencies. As the amendment identifies, we have a range of arm's-length bodies that have and continue to deliver effective outcomes for this government and, importantly, for our citizens. Those bodies are as relevant now as they were in 2010 when the subject was last debated.”
“As the Minister has already said, the public want services delivered. However, today is a very sad day because the public who came out to all those community planning meetings, providing their input and their ideas as to how they wanted their towns and villages regenerated, have been stomped over. Does the Minister have the support of the Northern Ireland Local Government Association (NILGA) or of any single council? Has any single council advocated this change, or is he telling local government what to think?”
“What action is the Minister taking to rationalise the administration of education in Northern Ireland to ensure that the system allows adequate pay for teachers and adequate resources for our schools?”
“I was going to ask the Minister whether or not he had raised with the Executive the financial savings in the long run from sustainable buildings, whether they be homes, offices or public-sector buildings, but given his announcement today, can the Minister give us a quick update on the research on standards and the value for money that he spoke about and that is already under way?”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. I take him back to page 4, on halls of residence. There is only one very small hall of residence in my constituency, at Queen's University marine biology station. What impact will the change have on the hard work being done to attract external students to Belfast? The change may make Belfast a bit more expensive. It will also make it more expensive for rural dwellers who want to send their children to halls of residence or are themselves students. Will it have a negative impact on places like the Holylands?”
“We need to put the pupil, not buildings, first, and we should not be keeping a school open for the sake of it. The Department must learn from the Education and Training Inspectorate's reports and stop working in silos. We cannot afford to maintain the school estate in the way it is because it is reducing opportunities for our children.”
“Hard questions need to be asked: why are we keeping a school open? Why are we not putting the pupils' education first? I cannot support its call for a strategic small schools initiative, as I fail to see how different that approach will be from the official Opposition's position of a statutory presumption against closure. <BR /> <BR />Proper governance does not mean promising populace protection. We need to review the school estate, as outlined in the PAC and the chief executive's recommendations. That includes consulting the community so that they know the impact that small pupil numbers have on the educational opportunities for their children. Armed with facts, people can help to make decisions about education provision in the local area.”
“If the Department concentrates on ensuring that children are provided with a quality education system, it can ensure the sustainability of the school estate to allow for the stabilisation of enrolment numbers and provide a wider choice for pupils of educational opportunities and leisure, cultural and sporting activities. <BR /> <BR />As I said, I will not support the original motion. I believe in children, not buildings. As a mother, I want my child and all children to have access to the best education, and, like many rural families, I am content for my child to travel to access that education. I acknowledge that the DUP amendment recognises the sensitivities around the provision of the school estate, and I welcome the DUP's acknowledgement of sectoral bodies such as NICIE and CnaG, but this is not about buildings and ownership of land.”
“Many rural children travel to school every day without that journey having a negative impact on their community. <BR /> <BR />In conclusion, I agree that the Department should do better. Area planning decisions must be based on robust evidence and accurate data to take into account all school enrolments. The PAC report asked that, following a review of enrolments, the Department quantify how much surplus places cost. As the PAC identifies, that would provide a driver for change as it would identify how much resource could be invested more effectively in the education system.”
“We have to remember that the scheme used in England and Wales for small, isolated rural schools was created to protect schools like the one on Rathlin because of their unique geographic location. We do not have areas like the Highlands and Islands of Scotland or north Yorkshire. We have only Rathlin. There are children in Scotland and England who have to travel in excess of 20 miles — sometimes many, many more — to get to a primary school. I ask each and every one of us this question: how many schools do our children pass on a 20-mile journey from home? In my case, it is probably about 10 primary schools. It is not wrong for children to have to travel to school. My daughter travelled over three miles every day to get to her local rural primary school.”
“<BR /> <BR />The only rural school in this country that we should give special consideration to is St Mary's Primary School on Rathlin. The reasons for supporting a primary school on Rathlin are clear. The island is cut off from the mainland regularly, making it impossible for primary-school children to travel to and from school each day. Unlike post-primary provision, there is no boarding option for primary-school children in Ballycastle or the surrounding area. Therefore, it is right that we should support a primary school on Rathlin for the small number of children living there. The school should be protected because of its unique island setting. The motion refers to protections against closure as used in England and Scotland.”
“as part of any consideration to merge or even close a school. <BR /> <BR />The Department of Education and the Education Authority need to engage in a meaningful consultation and not just pay lip service to local communities. Local communities need to feel that they are part of the process of helping to decide what is best for their young people and what education provision they want to see in the local community. Far too often, schools hear that they are being earmarked for closure without proper support from either managing authority. A one-size-fits-all model will not work; and what works in one rural community may not work in another. That is why it is vital that the community is involved in any discussions about the future of education in their area.”
“<BR /> <BR />If fact-based evidence is available, the Department, the school and the school community, including families and prospective pupils' families, will have a full picture as to why a rural school may no longer be viable. Schools, particularly primary schools, are deeply seated in the communities that they serve. If evidence suggests that enrolment numbers are in decline, the community must be made aware of the issue and be involved in the decision as to how to provide the best education for children. In recommendation 8, the report confirms the need for an engagement strategy or, as it calls it, a "'buying in' to the process" or, as I prefer, community consultation. In the Alliance amendment, we clearly state that:”
“This will ensure that appropriate area-based planning is considered and positive action can be taken, well in advance, to support rural schools to take steps to safeguard against falling below the approved enrolment figures and the negative impact that that will have for pupils, or consider alternatives, whatever they may be. At all times, the matter must be based on a child-centred approach, not to protect a building or jobs, and that applies to schools in urban and rural areas. The PAC report recommends, in recommendation 1, that there is transparency, consistency and clarity in decision-making, based on both quantitative and qualitative data. In recommendation 5, it repeats that decision-making should be based on robust evidence and data collection.”
“I do not believe that rural children should be put at a disadvantage, just because some people want to retain a building in an area. The needs of the child should come first. <BR /> <BR />In the PAC 'Report on Department of Education: Sustainability of Schools', recommendation 4 confirms the need for the Department to commission a review of the approved enrolment figure recorded for every school. It is extremely important that the Department has up-to-date records of the current and expected enrolment for each school.”