Colin McGrath
South Down · Social Democratic and Labour Party · Northern Ireland
“Minister, regardless of where people stand on the exact figure, surely we can all agree that a health service cannot function without the doctors whom it trains.”
“Minister, climate change is happening, and extreme weather events are taking place. We saw that in Downpatrick a number of years ago when the town centre was ravaged by flooding, and it has taken the businesses affected many years to try to get over that flooding.”
“Minister, given that capital funding is, generally, being decimated, the extent of which may increase as a result of the Executive's not agreeing a Budget, what impact will that have on any final road maintenance strategy, and are any contingencies being put in place to manage that?”
“<BR /> <BR />Since March 2025, the parliamentary excellence programme has delivered dedicated sessions with the Executive Office on the strategic framework and its delivery plan, enhancing Members’ understanding of the cross-government approach and their role in scrutiny, legislation and constituency engagement.”
“<BR /> <BR />More broadly, the Assembly Commission supports Members and Committees in carrying out their scrutiny functions, including in relation to the Executive Office’s work on that framework.”
“As the Member mentioned, one example is the Assembly's Women's Caucus, which has a particular focus on supporting women in public life and highlighting the increasing challenges that women face in the digital sphere, including online abuse.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,662 lines we hold for Colin McGrath, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 50 of 54.
“We all knew that Brexit would have a detrimental impact on the farming community, and we saw the immediate negative impact it had on the agri-food industry. It was clear that much work was needed to assist the farming and agri-food community, and much more needs to be done. <BR /> <BR />It is clear that the uncertainty caused by Brexit over the past three years has impacted negatively on many different sectors in farming, and thankfully we have the opportunity today to provide some clarity to farmers across the North and continue the vital support over the next two years. I welcome the discussion tonight and hope that colleagues across the House will support this LCM.”
“Absolutely. We are playing catch-up, and that is what we are doing this evening on a decision that needs to be taken as the clock counts down the last minutes. I would have loved to have had the opportunity over the last number of years to have these conversations, but, alas, that was not possible. <BR /> <BR />Single farm payments and the millions more in funding that we receive from the EU are part of the reason why the SDLP was resolutely opposed to Brexit and campaigned hard against it in 2016. As soon as the referendum result became clear, notwithstanding the fact that people here had voted to remain, the SDLP consistently raised the issue with the British Government and colleagues in Dublin and Brussels.”
“Not only are the payments critical financially for communities across the North, but single farm payments and EU membership have played a huge role in increasing environmental and public health standards, and we hope that that will continue.”
“Members across the House will be aware of the vital importance of direct payments to farmers. Those critical payments make up a significant proportion of income and secure the viability of many farms and rural communities across the North, and acutely in my own constituency of South Down. South Down has hill farming in the Mournes, the Lecale coastline and down as far as Warrenpoint. All of those farming communities will welcome this debate and a positive outcome from this LCM this evening. <BR /> <BR />For many farmers, the issue of single farm payments is one of survival; it is about whether a farm is viable or not. I welcome the support, hopefully, of the House for the LCM and ensure the continuity of these payments.”
“I thank the Minister for his early action on this important issue. He recognises how important it is to farmers and how important the agri-food industry is to the economy across the North.”
“It is good and proper that we welcome the Minister to his position and wish him all the best, but we should spread the love to you, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, on taking up the role. We hope that the view is good from up there and that you will remember us down here. I look forward to your decisions and, of course, abiding by them and following them.”
“I join other Members in congratulating the Minister on his appointment, and I wish him well in his role. I notice and welcome the inclusion of additional finances for the Executive Office for historical institutional abuse victims. I am sure that many would agree with me that they are among those for whom we should be prioritising our efforts. Will this investment allow for an indicative time frame for when those payments can be made available to those victims?”
“We must do all that we can to mitigate the worst excesses of Brexit and ensure that we are on the side of business and trade sectors. They have been a powerful voice of reality in the midst of much noise of late, but we must now focus on their needs. <BR /> <BR />I hope that the withholding of our consent for the Bill will send a message to the British Tory Government that we do not agree with it and that it must be improved. I hope that such a collective rejection of the Bill here will send the message to Prime Minister Johnson that we want that unfettered access for trade and no imposition of additional borders, costs or delays when conducting trade from the North.”
“It is positive that, albeit for our different motivations, we have a collective political voice on this matter in the House, and we can show our political maturity on the issue by setting the politics aside and working together for the business community out there. I hope that this sends a positive message to them. <BR /> <BR />The withdrawal Bill is laced with uncertainty and ambiguity, and there is a clear lobby from the business sector here that it wants just the opposite: it wants to know exactly how business will be transacted. In the absence of such clarity, it has worries, and we share in those worries and concerns. <BR /> <BR />Politically, we believe that Brexit, in whatever form, is not good for Ireland. The overwhelming consensus on the imposition of borders, be they fiscal or trade, hard or soft, is that they are not good.”
“We campaigned hard against Brexit, and we do not believe that there is a good version of Brexit. Although we believe firmly that nothing is as good as remaining, this deal is particularly challenging and destructive for people in the North. It does not protect our interests in the way that the backstop would have done, and it has united Members across the House in opposition. <BR /> <BR />There are various political views and positions on Brexit, but there is collective agreement that any hindrance to trade, east or west, is not good for business here and will introduce an additional layer of bureaucracy that business can ill afford to manage.”
“Speaking in my capacity as an MLA, I call for the rejection of consent for the Bill. Across the North, over the last three years, Brexit has sharpened all the lines that the Good Friday Agreement helped to soften on borders, sovereignty and identity. We should have spent the last three years, since June 2016, talking about tackling poverty, creating opportunity and reconciling our island, but instead we have talked exclusively about Brexit — a problem that did not need to exist and that we did not consent to. <BR /> <BR />We in the SDLP have been proudly pro-European since our foundation almost 50 years ago. Our founder, John Hume, talked about the European Union as the world's greatest peace process, and our European identity has been woven through the politics of the SDLP ever since.”
“However, I am confident also, given the cross-Northern Ireland party support in Westminster for the amendments to the Bill, that the motion would have been supported by all the parties there as well as those that do not take their seats or that do not have seats there.”
“I will speak briefly as the Chairperson of the Committee for the Executive Office. For obvious reasons, there has not been any Committee consideration of the devolved provisions included in the withdrawal agreement Bill, so there is no Committee position. Nevertheless, it is safe to say that had the Committee been in place, there would have been significant scrutiny under the legislative consent procedure of those provisions that alter the competence of the Assembly. As the First Minister has outlined, that has not been possible, meaning that the way in which the issue is being dealt with today has been unavoidable, and we understand that.”
“I congratulate Minister Weir on his appointment. It will provide a certain amount of continuity, and I look forward to discussing important issues, such as special educational needs and youth services, in the period ahead. <BR /> <BR />In the context of today's announcement, there is sometimes a bit of concern that the time between the announcement and the shovel going into the ground can be too long. Can the Minister give us some assurances about the work that he will undertake to ensure that these projects are delivered in a timely manner?”
“I ask the Minister this question without any malice. Can he understand how, because of the way a number of funding schemes in his Department have rolled out, there is a perception from some in our community that the decisions are sectarian?”
“We cannot allow London, Sinn Féin or the DUP to do any more damage to the democratic will of the people of Ireland and to our agreement.”
“Many things had to happen as a result of the Good Friday Agreement that addressed tens if not hundreds of years of imbalance. Some things had to be swallowed in order to give us a fair and equal society. <BR /> <BR />We now say to the two Governments that they must show their good authority and have all-party talks across the full range of current requirements. Sinn Féin has, in a panic, rushed us to the ballot box. Even its core constituency could no longer accept government on DUP terms, including RHI on DUP terms. In order to catch up, Sinn Féin has panicked and gone for an election. Let us be careful, because that election could end up giving London more power here to do its worst — a London Government who will be, all at once, hard unionist, hard Brexit and hard Tory.”
“We call on government to affirm the heart, soul and practices of the agreement. We call for all-party talks that embed and do not erode the value of the Good Friday Agreement and grow and not sideline any of strands one, two or three, none of the requirements that deal with all the unresolved issues, and help us to address the horror that is coming down the line with Brexit. <BR /> <BR />That is no easy task, but the SDLP has never gone down the easy road. We faced down state violence and paramilitary terror. We argued for political accommodation, for policing reform and for government that knew that much of its business would be jobs, houses and health.”
“<BR /> <BR />The question now, of course, is this: how does Northern Ireland keep going? Do we go in the direction of failure, or do we affirm the Good Friday Agreement, its values and ambition? One of its core principles, by its very nature, is that it accommodates different ambitions and identities and gathers us all round the right values. In essence, it is about the radical middle, because that middle is needed for all of the Good Friday Agreement and its institutions to work to the optimum. For its ambitions to be realised, the agreement needs the people and parties who are fully committed to its values and outworkings. <BR /> <BR />Ten years of DUP rule with Sinn Féin consent has failed us and will continue to fail us. We have a different ambition: we call on people to get back to the heart and soul of the Good Friday Agreement.”
“The SDLP spoke straight with the people of Northern Ireland. We said that 'A Fresh Start' was not what it claimed to be. Others were not straight, and 'A Fresh Start' has proved to be a false start. We were straight with the people of Northern Ireland. We told them that we would not go into government on DUP terms. Others did so with no firm commitments on equality, language, North/South bodies or equal marriage and nothing on addressing the deep concerns about public finances and how they are managed. We were straight when others were not. In the last weeks of last year, the DUP and Sinn Féin said that they were working hard for people, with articles in the 'Belfast Telegraph' and briefings about how great things are. Now we know the truth. We were straight with the people of Northern Ireland when others were not.”
“Where is the equality? Maybe it is a different slant on the Trojan Horses that we hear about.”
“<BR /> <BR />The SDLP has warned that real damage has been done to the concept and practice of the Good Friday Agreement, particularly in the last 10 years. We warned that the spirit and substance of the agreement were being degraded. We said that the DUP was attempting to reconfigure the agreement in the image of the old world that it knew and loved. We were public in saying that Sinn Féin was agreeing to government on DUP terms. Where did all the new roads go? Where do they not go? Where is the equality Bill? Where is the Irish language Bill? Is there a dedicated anti-poverty strategy in the Programme for Government applauded by the DUP and Sinn Féin only eight weeks ago? The DUP has tried hard to diminish the value, contribution and substance of the Good Friday Agreement. Sinn Féin has been weak and has been powerless to prevent them.”
“It has been and remains a sound road map to the society that we want and the type of community that wider society needs. It is an agreement that addresses the people of the North: that is strand one. It addressees the relationship between the people of the North and the rest of Ireland: that is strand two. It addresses the relationship between the people of Ireland and Britain: that is strand three. Those three strands were underpinned by the basic principles that must always extend in any civil society: respect, parity of esteem and equality, to name but three. Those strands and principles should have been the standards of the past. They should be the principles of the present, and, for us, they are still part of the vision for the future.”
“Last night, people believed that it was acceptable for them to head out of their homes, pick up weapons and seek out a young police officer and target him with death. Nothing could be further from the principles of the Good Friday Agreement, and I offer him my best wishes for his recovery. What happened last night was a failure of some to live up to the core of the Good Friday Agreement and to ensure respect, parity of esteem and, indeed, equality. However, I note that where we are in society now is not where we could be. <BR /> <BR />We have consistently asked for a political process not a security process, a political solution not a paramilitary one. If you were to ask us if we would have the Good Friday Agreement again, our reply would be yes, yes and yes. For sure, we would do it again.”
“I rise this evening to propose the motion about the principles of the Good Friday Agreement. The people of Ireland, North and South, overwhelmingly endorsed the Good Friday Agreement in 1998 after the talks that were the culmination of the peace process, which brought ceasefires to our communities, saw violence removed from our streets and brought hope to the people of the North. In that moment of hope, people were led to believe that we would deliver a future that was free from the shackles of the past. <BR /> <BR />We must acknowledge and never lose sight of where we are now and just how far we have come, but the process is always fraught with dangers and worries. Only last night, one of our police officers was shot whilst carrying out his work trying to deliver a safe and welcoming community in north Belfast.”
“Thank you for giving way. Do you take the point that there is a difference between an incentive scheme and one that has absolutely no controls in it — a badly managed scheme — and that the people of Northern Ireland and Members are angry at the way this scheme was managed, as opposed to any incentive that there may or may not have been in it?”
“Can the Minister give some assurance that he will work with his Department to ensure that, if the money is made available in the budget, those people's jobs will be secure?”
“Many community initiatives are delivered by the Youth Service, and many youth workers across Belfast received protective notice this week because of a funding issue. I welcome the Minister's statement today —”
“The Executive are not working for the people of Northern Ireland. They have failed them; they have let them down. The time has come for change in Northern Ireland for the good of people.”
“To have less than 50% of the electorate in places turning out for an election is an indictment of the inactivity.”
“We have had bluster, argument, bickering, petty, cheap point-scoring, a sectarian-based silo mentality and party political inactivity that has left the people of Northern Ireland in want, communities with their hearts ripped out and a public service delivered to an all-time low standard, matched only by the low level of faith that our electorate have in the institutions.”
“Our Communities Department should have directed and steered local councils to work on the ground to upgrade our town centres. Our Infrastructure Department should have monitored access to town centres to breathe new life into the way people get into them. <BR /> <BR />When I think of Market Street in Downpatrick, I realise that virtually every Department has its say and its work to do, but have we had the joined-up forward thinking from an innovative Executive required to do the work? Not on your nelly.”
“Did our Infrastructure Department even try to provide a direct bus service between two hospitals when the consultants refused to leave their ivory tower hospitals and go out into the sticks? So much is left to small units in big silo Departments to sort out, and, when they fail, they cry that it was too tough a job to do on their own. <BR /> <BR />Main Street in Downpatrick is a further example. For years, it has been neglected by this Executive. We, like many others, have had the heart ripped out of our town centre, and this Executive should have responded with joined-up working. The Department for the Economy should have delivered initiatives as economic drivers to help new starts and to specialise the focus on products. Our Finance Department should have looked at new tax regimes and developed business improvement initiatives.”
“A prime example is the failure of the Executive to deliver appropriate, sustainable health services at the Downe Hospital, which is almost a scandal in its own right. The £64 million newly built hospital had wards closed before its official opening day. Despite all the pressures that we face in accident and emergency units, a newly built unit in the Downe Hospital has been downgraded year after year to part-time status and — just about — a minor injuries unit at the weekend. <BR /> <BR />Whilst we hear of recruitment problems, financial pressures and service delivery burdens, the failure of the Executive is that they have not worked collectively to fix the problems. Did DETI or the new Department for the Economy attempt to assist with new university places? Did our employment services look to overseas recruitment?”
“<BR /> <BR />This Executive, working as they have done for so many years with a silo mentality, have let loose Ministers who often had the mist of party politics blinkering their views rather than the good of the community that they serve. We have seen most acutely in the present Executive how divisive, ineffective, solo run Ministers running party agendas have brought this place to its knees as a result of their crass, selfish mentality. <BR /> <BR />Whilst this behaviour affects politics generally across our country and belittles and demeans our institutions in Stormont, the impact of the problem can end up lying much more locally. I think of how my constituency has been badly let down.”
“I support the motion on the failures of the Executive. To begin, it is important to mention that the greatest failure of the Executive has been the monumental and overwhelming way in which it has attempted and succeeded in places to polarise our politics and sectarianise our institutions, and the gross way in which it has let down the aspirations and wishes of the people of Northern Ireland. There have been year-on-year reductions in the number of people turning out to vote and even bigger numbers switching off from politics. We in the House must ask ourselves why this is happening. What is turning people off politics? The answer is: RHI, NAMA, Red Sky, Research Services Ireland, SIF funding and Charter NI. The list goes on and on. There has been scandal after scandal.”
“My first question to the Health Minister in this mandate was about the Downe Hospital. It would appear that my last question to the Health Minister in this mandate will be about it, too. Does the Minister feel that monitoring round money offers an excellent opportunity for pilot projects which can help excellently located facilities such as the Downe Hospital to provide services locally and also help to ease pressures in the wider hospital network?”
“It is a bad decision. Please make the right one, Minister.”
“Certainly. We must stop this decision being taken on Bushmills and the other centres. We have to stop being biased against them because they are good at their job, are competitively priced, are located in the right place and are overwhelming loved by the children who attend them.”
“If you are able to share ownership of those stories, you can share ownership of the bad-news stories as well. <BR /> <BR />You told us that the Education Authority is made up of political representatives. You are correct: eight of the 20 members on the board are political representatives. Four of them belong to the DUP, and I hope, Minister, that you will lobby them as well to make the right decision on this closure scenario.”
“We know what that means: we are talking about increased prices to be able to achieve and drive more profits. Even the voluntary centres now charge more than the statutory centres. I hope that when the decision is taken — I say "when" because I have no faith in the consultation decision — that will be considered. <BR /> <BR />I want to accept the assertion that the Minister made last week that this decision is being taken by the Education Authority, but I know that the Minister understands my view on this because I have said it many times before. The Minister is the decision maker when it comes to education in Northern Ireland. It is therefore eventually up to you to overturn the decision, if it is made. I am sure that you, like any other Minister, past or present, would be happy to turn up for a good-news story by an arm's-length body.”
“One of the variables used was the location of the centre and its proximity to other voluntary centres. What that means is that, if you remove a statutory centre, groups can simply trot up the road and go to the next one. That is fictitious on several grounds. First, it makes the massive assumption that the voluntary centres are empty, and they are not. There may be some capacity in them, and I am happy that that capacity be utilised fully, but I am somewhat disappointed that that will be achieved by closing down the statutory centres and then creating an over-demand scenario in the voluntary sector. Secondly, I am a little bit concerned, because I am not entirely sure what we mean when we use the term "voluntary sector". Many of the centres and provisions that will end up having to be used will be in the private sector.”
“I thank the Member for securing the Adjournment debate, which is similar to the one that we had last week. I do not wish to rehearse what was said last week, because the points were well made by everybody. It was one of those rare occasions when each and every side of the House was in agreement about the situation that we find ourselves in. Hearing the same remarks today reiterates the point that we made last week that this process needs to be paused, and I welcome hearing those remarks. There were two or three things that, I feel, were not said last week, and I will bring them into today's debate, because they are as relevant to Bushmills as they are to the three County Down centres. <BR /> <BR />The first issue that I want to discuss is the criteria.”
“<BR /> <BR />Our children will have fun in these places; they will learn and gain new skills and make long and lasting friendships; they will break down barriers and help to develop our country; they will be the leaders of tomorrow. We owe them the opportunity to learn the skills that they need. Let us not cut provision and make our outdoor education centres the preserve of the chosen few; let us make them a luxury that we can offer to many. I plead with the Minister: please keep all our outdoor education centres open.”
“It said "and outdoor education centres", not "merely" outdoor education centres. One would have thought that the review of the Youth Service estate and outdoor education centres would be undertaken in a complementary manner, not picking one sector and then doing the other. What if the rationalisation in the Youth Service estate in that consultation might save money that could then be pumped into the outdoor education sector? Why is it being done in such a disjointed manner? We have to get answers to those questions. <BR /> <BR />I conclude by saying to the Minister that he has the power to intervene, that he has the capacity to stop this massacre of our outdoor education centres. It is too early in the lifetime of the Education Authority (EA) for this decision to be taken. It is being taken for all the wrong reasons.”
“<BR /> <BR />I worry too, Minister, about the fact that this decision, with all its enormity and impact, its employment consequences and the emotions that are stirred, is being delivered by an interim head of Youth Service, who will report to an interim chief executive. Is it fair, Minister, that you want these momentous decisions to be taken by people in interim roles? If it all goes wrong, it could maybe even see your position being interim too. <BR /> <BR />The review is being carried out as a response to the 'Priorities for Youth' document of a few years ago, which stated that:”
“There is also a glaring inconsistency in the figures in the document used to calculate the rank order of those centres that are to be closed. In the review document supplied to us the order has Shannaghmore listed as third, Killyleagh fourth, Bushmills fifth and Ardnabannon sixth; yet in the evidence document Bushmills is third, Shannaghmore fourth and Killyleagh and Ardnabannon are joint sixth. This decision will see people losing their jobs and having to relocate, villages having the heart ripped out of them, and a lifetime impact on our youth. Are you prepared, Minister, to allow such a consultation to proceed with such schoolboy errors in such an important document? I can hear the judicial reviews being warmed up from here.”
“<BR /> <BR />The building status is another fallacy that is trotted out in the document. The building survey that has been completed is not just a list of the essential and urgent work that is required but a list of what could be done to the buildings, which includes some urgent remedial work. Let me compare that to a holiday. I could go to Barbados in the Caribbean for my holiday, but I will probably only be able to afford somewhere in Europe. If I am lucky, I might be able to add a couple of weekends here and there, maybe even in north Down. That is where the difference is. It is the difference between what we can do, what we would like to do and what we actually do. To use that as a factor is a little unfair, especially when it results in one centre being picked over another for closure.”
“<BR /> <BR />There is concern about the way in which the figures for occupancy rates have been calculated and used in the document. The occupancy rate that all centres are benchmarked against is similar to that for the hotel industry. The hotel industry is a highly competitive industry that achieves big profits when it gets a high occupancy rate of around 75%. At that level, it is doing very well and is able to deliver profits for the owners. There is no such need for profits in the outdoor industry. Covering the costs and breaking even are perfectly acceptable. Therefore, to benchmark the centres against the Savoy or the Europa is unfair and a little bit crass. When benchmarked against all other outdoor education centres in the rest of the UK, the centres that are proposed for closure compare very favourably.”
“They have facilitated our young people to host guests from far and wide, make friends and share cultures, but, more importantly, they have helped our young people to open their mind and stretch their personal horizons far and wide as well. Why, oh why, would we cut back on them and reduce our capacity? <BR /> <BR />I turn to the consultation. I am disgusted that, once again, we have consultation Northern Ireland-style, which is one in which the proposed outcomes are included in the introductory paperwork. That is a joke. It is a humiliation of the good people of Northern Ireland and makes a farce of the consultation process. I want to highlight a couple of elements of the consultation and the flaws that I see, in order to help the Minister take the decision that we would like taken.”