Steve Aiken
South Antrim · Ulster Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“I thank the Minister for his statement. Minister, as well as the move to reduce the cost to the Assembly of vacant non-domestic properties and to increase liability so that we will not have so many vacant properties, you will be aware of the Dilapidation Bill and of the conversations that have been taking place in Wales and Scotland about…”
“Instead, that most dysfunctional Department, under the most inept Sinn Féin Minister in the Northern Ireland Assembly and a series of grossly over-superannuated permanent secretaries, gave the money back.”
“We know that her Department spends more on legal cases, fighting judicial reviews and being chastised by judges for legal ineptitude and on vesting land and ripping out hedges and fencing and then trying to unvest it and paying even more money to put back the fences and hedges that it took out.”
“We can hardly blame the current permanent secretary, as she has just taken up her post, but, surely, her predecessors must bear some accountability or responsibility, especially considering the senior civil servants' salary scale of between £146,000 and £163,000, with, of course, their taxpayer-funded pension contribution of 34·2% — £218,…”
“It must be said that £181·3 million is a lot of taxpayers' hard-earned money. It is money that is raised from local commuters, vehicle owners, farmers, local businesses, logistics companies and, above all, our constituents — those vital people whom we are elected to represent.”
“The Minister will be aware that, under the public appointments guide published by the Executive Office, it is clear that she is supposed to take independent advice before appointing board members. What independent advice did she receive, particularly about the board members selected?”
The complete record
Every one of 2,489 lines we hold for Steve Aiken, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 21 of 50.
“The sartorial elegance that you have shown today and yesterday has been wonderful to see. We rubbed off on you at some stage. <BR /> <BR />With the prospect of better and more informed scrutiny of financial matters, and on behalf of the Committee for Finance, I commend the Final Stage of the Budget Bill 2022.”
“Perhaps, in his winding-up speech, the Minister will provide some clarity on the £400 million of additional money generated by the increase in all of our national insurance contributions. Will the Department of Health, for which that money has been earmarked for waiting list reductions, be able to access that money without accruing resource in 2022-23 without an Executive in place? Many of us are aware that much of that money has already been accrued, so we need to look at whether there is any possibility of it being accessed. <BR /> <BR />I do not want to finish on that uncertain note, as the Committee and Minister have made progress in respect of financial scrutiny during the mandate. Let me thank him and my colleagues on the Committee for that. Indeed, let me thank Mr McHugh, who is now wearing a fine suit and a nice tie.”
“<BR /> <BR />COVID still plays an important role in the spending in 2021-22, with, perhaps, an extra £1·5 billion coming from our Government this year. The schemes that the Executive devised, which were backed by that money, have made a real difference to hard-pressed businesses during these difficult times. It is hoped that individuals and households will also benefit from the Executive's cost-of-living measures. <BR /> <BR />The Bill also provides for a Vote on Account. That is not a Budget: it is a kind of float for the Department for the first few months of 2022-23. Given the current political position, the Committee intends to explore with officials what Departments and, indeed, Ministers will and will not be able to do with the Vote on Account in the absence of an Executive.”
“The Committee for Finance enjoys a special position in that it has a unique set of responsibilities when it comes to the scrutiny of Budget Bills and the associated founding Supply resolutions. The Committee takes those responsibilities seriously and has sought to work with the Department to prove the understandability of the Estimates and related documentation. <BR /> <BR />As I indicated at Second Stage, new financial reporting legislation has been passed, Estimates memoranda have been issued and a Fiscal Council has been established in the past 12 months. Those are already proving to be beneficial, and I expect more improvements to follow. That is very positive, and all involved are to be commended in that regard.”
“On behalf of the Committee for Finance, I thank the Minister for his opening remarks. The Committee considered the draft rule at its meeting on 2 March 2022. As the Minister said, the rule will reduce the statutory fees that are charged when data is registered for domestic and non-domestic energy performance certificates, display energy certificates and air conditioning inspection reports. The Committee welcomed the reduction in cost and was content to recommend to the Assembly that it affirm the rule.”
“<BR /> <BR />I thank everybody for attending the debate tonight.”
“Mr Speaker, there is no way that we would ever try to abuse your position and role in the Assembly. <BR /> <BR />I will wind up fairly shortly with this point. The key message is that we have been given an opportunity. We must get some form of Executive back to enable us to take advantage of it. We must prioritise. We cannot lose the opportunity. The one thing that I can be certain about is that, if we end up with only 45% of the Budget that can be spent by the end of July and if we then have to go into special measures to get to 95% of the Budget by the end of the year — the baseline of last year's Budget, not the one that there is now — that will have real implications for our services, our policing numbers, our nurses, our teachers and our economy. Ladies and gentlemen, Members of the Assembly, we must do much better.”
“Indeed. The beauty of having the Fiscal Council and the Fiscal Commission is being able to have people with independent views and perspectives to look at our processes. Anybody who has read the Fiscal Council's report will know that it makes for sobering reading. In effect, it tells us where we need to make improvements and make them work. As we go forward, hopefully, we need to develop an open relationship among the Fiscal Council, the Assembly's Committees and the Executive so that we understand not only how our moneys are being spent but how they are being spent effectively.”
“<BR /> <BR />I thank the Committee for Finance for all of the hard work that it has done, RaISe for the work that it has done and the Minister for noting the fact that it was the Ulster Unionist Party that first asked, way back in Stormont House, for a Fiscal Council to be set up, as we needed somebody to check our homework because, frankly, we were not to be trusted to do that.”
“We must look at what our priorities are, listen to what everybody has said in the Assembly, take that as the baseline for where we need to go to and get it moving. We cannot afford to delay and dither. The world is moving on. It does not revolve around Northern Ireland. The issues that are going on in Ukraine and all over the world and the issues relating to the climate emergency mean that we cannot afford to sit on our hands, yet again, and pontificate for two or three years without an Executive or a Budget.”
“We need to prioritise what is essential and what we need to do. We need to recover from COVID; we need to sort out the problems with the health system; we need to deal with education; and we must do something about the catastrophic skills shortage in Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />We know that we had a Programme for Government. I have given up on how many outcomes and deliverables there were in it. Most normal places have three or four deliverables in their Programme for Government. If we were to write down the four things that we need to deliver for Northern Ireland, we know what they would be. That will be the role of the next Executive, if we have a next Executive, and the political parties.”
“When we look at some of the decisions that were made over the past couple of years, when we were not here, we realise the problems and where they lay. That is one of the main reasons why the Finance Committee decided that it was important to have the take-note debate. It will be recorded in Hansard. We can refer to it, and all Members will see our areas of priority and concern and the things that, we said, we should look at intently. <BR /> <BR />I will not rehash what every Member has said, because each Member and Committee has stated valid positions and points as we have gone through the debate. It is important that we listen to those because, despite the Budget that we have, it is obvious that there are considerable pressures out there. The word that we have heard time and again is "prioritisation".”
“We have heard time and again from civil servants and across the sectors in Northern Ireland that all we need is a bit of stability, understanding and long-term budgeting and we will be able to deliver. We had that opportunity, but we do not have it now. <BR /> <BR />Many of us will ask, "Why have a debate on something that we can't possibly manage because we don't have a Budget before us?". Regrettably, many of us sat for three years when nothing was going on here. I had numerous conversations with permanent secretaries about finance and where finances were going. On every occasion, they said, "Oh, we'll do what was in the last draft Budget. What we'll do is what was the intent of the Assembly". That was their interpretation of it. That did not exist. It was, basically, made up by some permanent secretaries.”
“I will take up 14 minutes, 59 seconds. First, I thank all of the contributors to the debate. As the Minister and many Members have pointed out, we wish that we were in a position to debate the real Budget and that that Budget could come forward. It is a matter of regret for all of us in the Assembly that we are not in a position to do that. We can talk about the argy-bargy of why we are in that position and all the rest of it, but it is regrettable because there are real pressures in Northern Ireland, particularly for our health service and in education, the economy and justice. We have seen them all. <BR /> <BR />After asking for a three-year Budget settlement, for many years, we now have it for the first time. We know that £47·9 billion is there for us to use for improving our services.”
“I am sure that Members will be delighted to know that I will not be taking up the full 15 minutes.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. One of the big questions that we have had on the Finance Committee has been about the uplifts that we have regularly seen coming through for Northern Ireland Water. Does the Chair have any idea of the quantum that is needed to get Northern Ireland Water on a sustainable footing? Has the Minister addressed how Northern Ireland Water is likely to get to that point?”
“Thank you for giving way. It is probably unusual for one Chair to come to another like this. You make a very valid point, which is that the Department of Health and the Health Minister have already identified what they need to do over the three years to make the transformation work. <BR /> <BR />Even from the Committee's initial scrutiny, do you have a sense that, if a Budget were agreed and out there, we would be able to meet many of those health requirements?”
“In that regard, I hope that the Minister, in his response, might provide some commentary on the pressures identified by the Departments and the financial control measures that, he thinks, will be needed for the three-year Budget period, including the potential for a fourth annual monitoring round or more departmental bid transparency or, perhaps, the inclusion of a three-year Budget projection in all of our new Estimates memoranda. We have a lot to talk about. <BR /> <BR />I will conclude there and commend the motion to the House. I await with interest the feedback from Members and, indeed, the Minister.”
“<BR /> <BR />I suspect that, notwithstanding the above, a successor Executive, whenever they appear, will have to address those problems, and a wider transformation will be required in order to deal with the underlying costs for all Departments and their arm's-length bodies. Regardless of the challenges that I have set out, it is clearly a good idea to have a three-year Budget, particularly one at the substantial level that we are talking about. It is also a good idea, obviously, to have a longer-term plan for all our services and how we deliver them. <BR /> <BR />The present process of informed public debate can be eliminated and the necessary exposition provided.”
“However, as a former member of a number of Statutory Committees, I know that Departments can be prone to a little exaggeration in those regards. My evidence for that is the very substantial bids and very surprising levels of reduced requirements in this year's and other years' monitoring rounds. Perhaps the Minister will share his thoughts on that in his response. Even allowing for that, however, it appears that the Budget will present a significant challenge to a number of Departments. I hope that the Committee Chairpersons will fulsomely set out their views in that regard.”
“<BR /> <BR />There are other clearer and very important pressures that are perhaps a bit more quantifiable. I am thinking of those that are identified in Agriculture, Economy and Justice. Those just might be addressed in some considerable part by the substantial carry-over from 2021-22 and by other future in-year savings. That is where the absence of political certainty right now and over the next few months may prove to be telling. <BR /> <BR />There is then another group of pressures in Infrastructure, Communities, Education and probably Health which appear to be very substantial indeed. I cannot speak to the veracity of all the claims that all of the Departments made when they were questioned by Committees; I will leave that to the Committee Chairpersons.”
“In some areas, such as health and education, we will clearly need the buy-in of all the political parties in the Executive, health and education professionals and, crucially, above all, the general public, if we are to deliver what is to be a truly transformative process. <BR /> <BR />Statutory Committees have provided some very useful commentary on the draft Budget. I expect that the Chairpersons and members of those Committees will set out their views shortly, and I have a few short remarks by way of summary. Almost all the Committees highlighted pressures in the 2022-25 period. In some cases, including the victims' pension scheme and replacing EU funding, the actual settlement from our own Government has not quite materialised yet so, although those are very important, they remain hard to quantify or put a timescale on.”
“Nevertheless, however attractive that proposition might be — that is, if we had an Executive, which we do not — it is also fair to say that the Executive do not perhaps have the best record in that regard, whether in terms of either their own resilience; the delivery of complicated, long-term, expensive projects; the overuse of consultants; or the use of the well-worn panacea of things like the voluntary exit scheme, which seems to have cost as much to deliver as it supposedly made in savings. Therefore, there is more that the House needs to know before it can sign off on such a Budget with any degree of confidence.”
“There is certainly a logic to the draft Budget, but those consequences and decisions that I mentioned earlier are perhaps something that we need to further explore before we decide on the way forward. The one thing that we can all agree on is that the three-year settlement is an opportunity. Where we are right now feels very much like "make your mind up time" on this budgetary process. <BR /> <BR />We all agree that health requires reform, patient waiting lists need to be reduced, outcomes need to be improved and our vital healthcare workers need better and more sustainable support mechanisms. Considerable sums have been earmarked, and there is an obvious timeline: it is three years. So, for many of us, what could be simpler? Let us get on with it and let us get moving.”
“As for the horse itself, it has a general direction of travel, but the route — the point of the Budget — is perhaps not as completely clear in all of the detail as it might be. <BR /> <BR />I will now turn to the point of the Budget that is perhaps the most challenging policy issue of all: that is, of course, in health. It is an immediate problem that has been with us and has been growing for quite a while. We all know that hard decisions in respect of health provision will be required. That is not to say that climate change is, in some way, not an emergency; it is. It is also not to say that the economy or the education system do not need the Executive's renewed support; they do. However, the size of the health problem, if not necessarily all of the solutions, is certainly bigger, nearer and getting a bit clearer all the time.”
“It also appears that regional rates will be frozen for the relevant period, although, again, formal Executive agreement for that is limited to one year. I mentioned both those aspects because they have large consequences for public finances. Those impacts, like the other impacts of the budget changes for Departments and the pressures that they create, are generally not fully expounded in the consultation documentation. There are also references to but not much explanation of big-ticket policy items such as green growth, which, presumably, will be greatly influenced by the anticipated passage of the climate change legislation, whichever Bill gets through. It therefore seems that the Programme for Government, the investment strategy, climate change, public finance and all Executive agreement carts have all been put before the Budget horse.”
“That bigger Budget envelope would give us the opportunity to plan for change and reform, but with reform must come decisions and, indeed, consequences. To some degree, the Budget sets out both of those; in other respects, we are left to underscore or fill in the blanks ourselves. <BR /> <BR />The Budget is not linked to a Programme for Government (PFG). Its capital spend was not shaped by an agreed investment strategy. The Budget itself has not been agreed by the Executive, because there is no Executive; indeed, in the absence of the Executive, the consultation process has been paused, and we have already spoken about that. <BR /> <BR />The draft Budget also seems to include a kind of public-sector pay promise that appears to be about 2% per annum, with more for the health sector.”
“<BR /> <BR />This, I think, will be our only chance in the mandate to debate the 2022-25 draft Budget. As the possible related financial decisions will have far-reaching consequences, I do not propose to waste this important opportunity. What is there to talk about? First and importantly, it is a three-year Budget with more money than usual in it compared with the pre-COVID baseline position. If we look at the figures from RaISe, we see that it is a Budget of somewhere around £47·9 billion. I will say that again: £47·9 billion. That is a significant amount of resource. The Fiscal Council tells us that that continues the upward trajectory of devolved spending and that we can be reasonably confident that promised money will materialise as we get through what is left of 2022 and on to 2025.”
“On behalf of the Committee for Finance, I thank the Business Committee for scheduling the debate and the Minister for agreeing to respond to it. <BR /> <BR />The debate is informed by the Budget document itself, the consultation on which had been scheduled to close today. It is also informed by the very useful Fiscal Council report, by the excellent scrutiny undertaken by Statutory Committees and by papers produced by the Assembly Research and Information Service (RaISe). I also thank the Fiscal Council and RaISe for their work and all the Statutory Committees that were able to respond with their thoughts and views. All that information from Committees and RaISe was shared with Members more than a week ago and will be in the public domain from now. The Fiscal Council report was, of course, published in January.”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. Minister, in your response, you said that you had asked all Ministers to respond as to whether you can release the funding. Which Ministers have not responded?”
“Welcome back, Minister. It is good to see you here. <BR /> <BR />The value of respite services is undoubted, not only for service users but, just as importantly, for their families and carers. The Minister took the right decision last year in ordering the PHA to undertake a review, and I welcome the fact that its implementation will be formally reviewed. Can the Minister confirm that, once finalised, all the trust rebuild plans will be published online, so as to provide maximum transparency and assurance?”
“I thank the Minister for his answers. I declare an interest as a governor at an excellent primary school, Kilbride Central Primary School. We have an election, so I thought that I would mention that. One of the big issues that people raise with us is this: we want to do some planting of trees but are finding it enormously difficult to source trees because of the problems that we have with the protocol. What can we do to sort that ridiculous situation out?”
“We sought to work with the Bill sponsor at all stages of the Bill because we believe that this place works best when people from all backgrounds work together in a proactive way. However, we want to see good legislation: we do not want to rush things and end up with wide and far-reaching ramifications. To that end, if the Bill sidelines or disadvantages other education sectors, even if that is an entirely unintended consequence, I am afraid that the Ulster Unionist Party will not be able to support the Bill at Final Stage.”
“We want to see high educational standards in our country and school places available for all, where there is appropriate demand. It is our view that parental choice and parental preference is the true measure of educational demand, and that should be respected in any proposed changes to our education system.”
“I thank the many Members who spoke to the various amendments in the second group. <BR /> <BR />Many of the questions have already been answered, but there was a question about increasing the speed of our processes. I will therefore make a few short, sharp remarks, because everybody has iterated what we need to do. <BR /> <BR />It has always been the goal of the Ulster Unionist Party to have a single education system that is naturally and organically integrated. We are supporters of organic integration as the best way in which to take the stigma out of engaging in a cross-community manner, and the best way in which to do that is to get people mixing from a young age. It has always been the Ulster Unionist position that we should be educating our kids together, and that is what we need to do.”
“I assure you that Mr Butler would be here in normal circumstances, but you will be fully aware that he is now looking after three young children who he is fostering at the moment. That is the reason why he is not here. I do not think that there is any other implication in that or that just hearing my dulcet tones in any way indicates that this is not UUP policy. I assure you that Mr Butler is fully behind everything that is being said here.”
“If there is no presumption or onus on new schools to seek integrated status, there should be no corresponding targets in the Department's strategy that measures success by the number of existing schools switching to integrated status or new schools formed with integrated status. We are not suggesting that that is a useful statistic to look at and interrogate, but, if it were measured as a distinct target or benchmark of success by the Department, surely that is presupposing the demand for integrated school places instead of reacting to demand. <BR /> <BR />On reflection, it is not my intention to move amendment No 17.”
“I thank the Bill sponsor for that comment. No, we do not expect that to be the circumstances. This is about ensuring the appropriate amount of support for all children, no matter where they happen to be. <BR /> <BR />Amendment Nos 15 and 16 seek to remove paragraphs from clause 9 that pertain to what targets and benchmarks of the strategy there may be. Those amendments are, in our opinion, consequential to the changes that were agreed and effected at Consideration Stage — namely, to what is now clause 8, "New schools". That clause originally had a presumption that all new schools would be integrated. It has now been agreed that the Department consider integrated status for new schools, and subsequent caveats are included.”
“The amendment seeks to introduce a new subsection into clause 9 that will safeguard the capital funding considerations of the other education sectors. As has been made abundantly clear, the concerns with the Bill are not that integrated education will be promoted or supported but that its provisions will have a detrimental impact on the other education sectors. Other parties have gone out of their way to assure the House and the wider public that the Bill will have no negative impact on other education sectors and to allay the fears that have been articulated by us and others. If that is the case, let us codify that in legislation. I hope that all of us can support that amendment.”
“We feel compelled to include that amendment as the Bill has not been subjected to any equality impact assessment under section 75 to do with protected characteristics. Given that there is immense fear in the CCMS and CSSC that the final provisions of the Bill will impact on their sectors, we believe that it is necessary to put that into the wording of the Bill. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 14 is vital. The UUP feels that it is necessary to allay the fears about the financial implications of the Bill's consequences, unintended or otherwise.”
“I said earlier that, given the complexities of the Bill and its very ambitious reach with regard to its strategy, regulations and support etc, it is vital that the legislation has flexibility and provision for the Department, for the sector and, indeed, for any future Minister of Education to create, in this case, a strategy that is fit for purpose and better reflects the needs of the sector and of parental preference. Furthermore, I feel that that is where we are experiencing the most significant disquiet among the controlled and maintained sectors. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 13 to clause 9 is needed to ensure that the outcomes of any integrated education strategy are equality impact assessed.”
“<BR /> <BR />Amendment Nos 5 and 6 relate to clause 5, which has been one of the most contentious clauses at all of the Bill's stages. Feedback from just about all other sectors indicates that there is a serious level of opposition to a duty to support one sector above another. Our amendments seek to define the meaning further in the Bill and to ensure that it specifically relates to the context of area planning and that the provision does not negatively impact on the sustainability of other schools nor interfere with the Province-wide parental preference that we all want to protect. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 12 to clause 9 is where we seek to ensure consistency in the Bill by leaving out the word "must" and inserting the word "may".”
“It will not have escaped Members' notice that the Bill has sparked a monumental discussion not just in this place but among different education sectors, in schools, in family homes and, of course, in many constituency offices, including mine. <BR /> <BR />The Bill has progressed through its various stages and now contains over 100 amendments. It had to be rescheduled to allow more time for further amendments to iron out unintended consequences from the Bill. It is fair to say that, in many ways, the Bill was not oven-ready. At Further Consideration Stage, amendments are meant to be limited in scope, but the Bill still requires some serious amendments before it can, in any way, be deemed to be fit for purpose.”
“In making my remarks, I will keep as closely as possible to the guidelines to make sure that I am speaking to the amendments. I am sure that Members will be quite happy with that. <BR /> <BR />I will begin the debate on the second group of proposed amendments to the Integrated Education Bill at Further Consideration Stage. I will move the bulk of the amendments in this group, and I will speak to their content and purpose in turn. <BR /> <BR />First, however, I would like to provide the context for why I feel compelled to move so many amendments at this stage of the Bill. I appreciate that all of us have scrutinised the Bill with an intense focus, and I do not want to dwell on matters that other Members will already be aware of.”
“In the debate at Consideration Stage, we articulated our opposition to the change in definition, which would move its prime focus away from educating pupils from different backgrounds together to one that focuses more on school ethos. We have always advocated for pupils to be educated together in an organic and natural integration, but the new definition dilutes that. We appreciate that those amendments are consequential. However, their tabling at this stage further highlights the far-reaching impact of changing the definition, and that is not something that we can support.”
“I agree: all sectors should be put on an equal footing. Many MLAs will talk about other areas, but I will talk specifically about South Antrim, where not all our children have the opportunity to go to their first choice of school or, indeed, their second choice of school. One of our real concerns is that, by taking one education sector and putting it above the others, we will be creating a system that will not be beneficial to our children. <BR /> <BR />Amendment Nos 21 and 22 are predicated on the definition of support in the Bill, which we cannot support in its current form. <BR /> <BR />Amendment Nos 23 to 28 seek to change the references to, and definitions of, integrated education in the Education Reform (Northern Ireland) Order 1989.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. Quite clearly, that is the implication and intent. Across Northern Ireland, we want to see all our children being educated together rather than one sector being promoted above the others. Talking to the amendment, anyone who has had conversations with many of the school principals and members of boards of governors across the piece will know that that is something that comes across very clearly. There is concern about one particular part of the education system being put above the others. Under the Bill, they will not all be equal or, indeed, together.”
“Please do not speak from a sedentary position, Mr Lyttle.”
“I will take the opportunity to do that as I go through the amendments. The Member will be very clear about our position when we discuss the amendments. <BR /> <BR />Amendment Nos 7, 8 and 9 seek to introduce the word "support" into clause 6, which was added to the Bill at Consideration Stage. The current definition of "support", as defined by the Bill, needs refined, hence our amendments, which will be debated later. In their current form, we cannot support amendment Nos 7, 8 and 9, as they will create a statutory duty for the Department to elevate integrated schools above those in other sectors.”
“I thank the Bill sponsor for her remarks. She feels very strongly about that, but we feel very strongly that the amendments are putting the integrated education sector above the other sectors, and that is not something that we can support.”