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 23 of 50.
“Thank you very much to the Member for giving way. During the Economy Committee's consideration, did the Committee have an opportunity to look at what the UK Oil and Gas Authority was saying? It is clear from the UK Oil and Gas Authority that fracking will not be permitted anywhere across the United Kingdom. Even though there is a moratorium in England, the clear intent of the UK Oil and Gas Authority is to make sure that there is no use of fracking anywhere in the United Kingdom.”
“Did any of them think that that was a good idea, or did they think that the full and rigorous implementation of the protocol should be carried out, despite what all Northern Ireland pet owners want to see?”
“I declare an interest as a pet owner. I own a young dog, and I am filled with worry, Minister. When you talked to the other members of the Executive, particularly those who wanted the rigorous implementation of the protocol, were they aware of recommendation 6 from the European Commission? That is:”
“Consequently, the Committee agreed to support the Bill, although one member indicated that he might set out a contrary position.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee was not at all convinced that the delegated powers in the Bill are required. The reasoning for them appears to be that the COVID pandemic might be renamed or that there might even be another pandemic during which such measures will be needed and quickly. I understand the scientific advice that the current pandemic may not be our final one. However, whether it is or is not, a successor Assembly would be minded to pass related emergency legislation promptly, thus obviating the need for the Henry VIII power in the Bill. <BR /> <BR />Notwithstanding that and the fact that the delegated powers in the Bill will be subject to an appropriate level of Assembly control, the Committee agreed to accept that aspect of the Bill as introduced.”
“The Committee also noted the absolute assurances from LPS that the economic impact of the pandemic will certainly be taken into account in the next and future non-domestic rates valuation processes. I and the members of the Committee note, Minister, the absolute assurances that LPS gave that that will take place. All of that was just about sufficient to persuade the Committee to support the relevant loss of appeal rights, but, again, Minister, I come back to the absolute assurances that we received from LPS. As indicated before, the Committee also accepted that in the expectation that targeted and well-thought-out Executive pandemic support measures would continue. Members believe that those measures are a much better way to support businesses than to constantly and partially revise non-domestic rates valuations.”
“Those appeals could, in turn, have adverse and unpredictable consequences, which might only materialise in subsequent mandates, for the public finances. <BR /> <BR />I turn now to the loss of a right of appeal. The Committee was concerned that the impact of the pandemic might be hard to predict. It seemed counter-intuitive to set aside an important related avenue of appeal for businesses. As I have just indicated, the problem with retaining the appeal mechanism is the legal and public finance uncertainty that it will generate. That is discussed further in the Committee's report. <BR /> <BR />The Committee welcomed the £50 million payment to businesses by way of a rates holiday in 2022-23, which we hope will still happen.”
“The first restrictions were issued just days before the NAV list, so the appeals valuation criteria were met for the current NAV period. As things stand, more recent COVID restrictions might also engage those criteria for the next NAV list, which is to be issued on 1 April 2023. <BR /> <BR />The Committee felt that the retrospective aspects of the Bill covered a period during which non-domestic ratepayers were in receipt of Executive pandemic supports. The supports were targeted and reportedly more generous than those available in other parts of our nation. The Committee also felt that, without the retrospective legislation, the ramifications of valuation appeals for whole business sectors and localities could take a considerable time to resolve and, indeed, could be significant.”
“The absence of consultation, however, was the main reason that accelerated passage for the Bill was denied. It also hampered the Committee Stage, as stakeholders, including councils, struggled to comment on important legislation that they had not seen before. The Committee agreed that the Department should not do that again. In future, it should properly explain its policies to its stakeholders and subject itself to the reasonable and considered scrutiny of the Committee for Finance, again in a timely manner. <BR /> <BR />The second area of concern related to the Bill's retrospective nature. The Committee understood that that was necessary, as appeals valuations can be made only for issues that arise between the antecedent valuation date and the issuing of the net annual value (NAV) list.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee believes that the best way ahead is not to revise non-domestic rates valuations. It is for the future Executive, whenever that will be, to bring forward targeted and generous support packages for those sectors that are badly affected by either COVID restrictions or varying levels of customer confidence. <BR /> <BR />The Committee was concerned about a number of things to do with the Bill. The first of those was the absence of consultation. Neither I nor the Committee is sure why the Department chose not to consult. Perhaps, as the Minister has already explained, it wished to avoid generating a very large number of valuation appeals, which there have been in another jurisdiction. I am not sure how successful that strategy has been.”
“Let me know when you are nice and settled, there, Mr Butler. Thank you very much indeed. <BR /> <BR />I thank the Minister for his opening remarks. My comments are made on behalf of the Committee for Finance. I begin by expressing the Committee's thanks for the oral and written briefings that the Department and a range of stakeholders provided on the Bill. That was all done, as the Minister noted, at short notice and during a period in which the adverse impact of the omicron variant on our hard-pressed local businesses became rapidly evident. <BR /> <BR />Although the Committee agreed to support the Bill, members were very much aware of the considerable and ongoing adverse economic effect of coronavirus on non-domestic ratepayers in Northern Ireland.”
“Thank you very much indeed, Mr —. After you, Mr Butler. Please, please.”
“The time has come to recognise that our Britishness has as much validity as Irishness and that the constant denigration of our aspirations is destabilising. If we are ever to be serious about sharing these islands, there needs to be a sustained and marked change of attitude. Is the stopping of the desecrating of memorials, or even the planting of a rose or a tree in our Parliament's grounds, or helping our community groups to celebrate Her Majesty's platinum jubilee, just too much to ask?”
“<BR /> <BR />In April 2014, along with many other business, civic and political leaders, I attended an event in Windsor Castle in the presence of Her Majesty, President Higgins and the then First Minister and deputy First Minister, one of whom was an acknowledged ex-senior member of the Provisional IRA. He personally acknowledged then that, although he did not agree with the UK Government or unionism, the British identity had equal validity to the Irish identity. Much has changed — for the worse — but what has not changed is the attitudes that were prevalent a century ago, and, to many of us, the hypocritical talk of mutual respect, understanding and a shared island is just that: hypocrisy.”
“The outrage that was raised by some when the role of the Royal Irish Constabulary was to be debated, never mind commemorated; the faux virtue-signalling of preventing modest memorial stones to celebrate our centenary; the failure by the Communities Minister to fund community celebrations and events to mark the platinum jubilee of Her Majesty; the refusal to even countenance a rose or a tree in the grounds of Stormont; and the despicable failure of the Irish President to attend an ecumenical church service, all point clearly to one thing: the sense of seeking to eradicate the British identify on this island is so deeply ingrained that there is, for far too many, no mutual respect and, indeed, very little hope of accommodation.”
“Please do not start the clock until I have actually stood up, Mr Speaker, thank you very much indeed. <BR /> <BR />I wish to speak about the desecration at Glasnevin cemetery. The news that the memorial in Glasnevin cemetery to the fallen from all sides has been desecrated again comes, regretfully, as no surprise. That those who sought to maintain the respectful monument to those who perished in 1916 and beyond have decided to cover up the memorial is a matter of regret. <BR /> <BR />A century ago, the events of 1921 led to the unionist community in what was then the newly formed Irish Free State being subjected to discrimination, house burning, ethnic cleansing, terror and murder. That is, far too often, conveniently ignored.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. One of the key factors in the action plans has to be the planning process. It is a damning indictment of us all. We are all legislators. We know that the planning system is broken. What are we, as a bunch of MLAs, doing collectively to sort out the planning system? The problem has been going on for years. Can we not decide to do something about it and make it work? Rather than an action plan, can it be an action for all of us in the Assembly to sort out the planning system once and for all? Between 250 and 500 weeks is far too long for any planning decision to come through. That is enough.”
“Thank you for giving way. Obviously, I am not aware of what is happening with the proposals for the Sydenham bypass. With something like the York Street interchange, we must bear in mind that we need to be able to move — it does not matter whether it is electric vehicles, vehicles powered by green hydrogen or whatever it happens to be — and that a degree of support for infrastructure is required. Are you proposing a moratorium on all road building? What about things like the York Street interchange, which will improve logistics and transportation flow and help the green agenda? What is your perspective on that?”
“As Chair of the Finance Committee, I am happy to work with anybody to look at financing, budgets and where we are likely to get to, but we need to achieve that.”
“We hear about how you want to get to zero net carbon by 2050, but where is the support, the infrastructure, and the joined-up thinking?". We need to consider those things as well. <BR /> <BR />I could go through other items — and, no doubt, we will — but those are the key points that I want to get across on the group 2 amendments about proposals and policies. As I said, our party's position all the way through has been that we want one climate emergency Bill that is joined-up, that works for all of us, and that sets realistic targets that can be met and will not destroy our economy. After yesterday's vote, it is vital that those on the other side of the House and those who support a just transition and other things explain how it will be done and what the budget lines are likely to be.”
“The infrastructure has been well laid out. We have an opportunity to do that, but it needs to be joined up in a much wider way with the rest of our transportation system. <BR /> <BR />Again, it comes back to a just transition. On my way home last night, several members of rural communities communicated with me that they were unhappy, to say the least, with the result yesterday. No doubt, many of you who have rural communities in your constituency will get similar telephone calls from people saying how unhappy they are with yesterday's result. They kept saying, "You are trying to bring this in, yet where is our rural transport network that you are talking about? Where are all the things that are supposed to be there to support us?”
“We have real concerns about how that is to be effectively managed and how it can be done without the full cooperation of the agricultural community, the rural community and local government. All of those issues have to be addressed. Going back to Mr McGuigan's comments, that has to be tied in with the just transition process. It cannot sit alone. Those things must all be brought together. <BR /> <BR />On active travel, I go back to Danny Kennedy and his approach of supporting bicycling. We need a much greater push towards active travel. I remember the comments about Mr McGuigan cycling all the way to COP26 and the difficulties there. One of the things that he will have noticed as he travelled in Scotland is that there are cycling lanes virtually everywhere, with the exception of the Campsie Fells.”
“If we are in a situation where it is virtually impossible to build charging units anywhere except on local government land and every time we try to do it somewhere else the likes of ESB and the electricity companies want to charge — I know of one example in my constituency — close to £300,000 for the connection of an EV charging unit to a new filling station area, that is gouging and needs to be investigated by the Public Accounts Committee and the Audit Office. That degree of dysfunctionality that is created by our monopolistic energy companies has to be dealt with and addressed. <BR /> <BR />We will not support amendment No 27 on the land use strategy.”
“We must be able to create a structure in Northern Ireland that supports a sustainable and environmentally friendly transport infrastructure. <BR /> <BR />We hear quite a lot about moving towards green hydrogen. We should all welcome that and make sure that it comes forward. However, we need the infrastructure to be built around it. It needs to be joined up, and we need an approach to it. That goes back to the point about why we desperately need to reform our planning system.”
“I know that Mr Blair has been quite interested in that area previously, but it is important that that vital element of our aquaculture is managed and managed effectively. It is about how we will look to do that. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 26 deals with the sectoral plans for transport. That is very clear. One of the things that we need to do is make sure that we have an appropriate EV charging system. That is simple, and it is available in the rest of our nation. Anybody who drives into a motorway service station anywhere near the M6 or the M62 — indeed, even if they take themselves down South to an Applegreen — and looks at the number of available charging stations will realise that Northern Ireland is not only badly served but appallingly served.”
“A just transition process has to be built into any plans. However, we are not dealing with something that is static or standing still. With the way that the climate emergency is working, our agribusiness sector and, indeed, the vast majority of our rural economy will be impacted much more rapidly than we thought previously. We need to understand and have a process in place for a just transition. <BR /> <BR />On the sectoral plans for fisheries, again, one of the issues that we heard many times is, of course, that seawater temperatures are rising and that new species are coming into the area as a result. We also see issues with fresh water fisheries. How will we effectively manage those?”
“That is a goal that we should have, and, rather than continuing to hold the people in the Hightown area and across south Antrim and north Belfast to the insidious incinerator that is supposed to be built at Hightown, we should get to the point where we realise that we need to increase recycling rates. I would like Mr Blair — this would probably be most appropriate coming from him or from Mr Muir — to address the Arc21 incinerator specifically and say why it needs to be stopped and stopped now. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 24 deals with the sectoral plans for agriculture. Minister and other Members, that amendment goes to the core of the issue. I welcomed Mr McGuigan's comments yesterday about a just transition, and, at some stage, I would like an explanation of how we see the just transition process working.”
“One of the things that the Ulster Unionist Party, would like to see — if we ever have another Government and a new Programme for Government — is, rather than having 42 outcomes, or whatever it happens to be, our fundamentally dealing with the climate emergency as a clear deliverable outcome of any future Programme for Government. That has to be cross-cutting and bought into by all Departments. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 23 deals with the sectoral plans for waste management. I declare an interest. I am, obviously, fundamentally against incineration, particularly the incineration that has been planned in my constituency by Arc21. We are moving towards 70% waste recycling.”
“The second amendment in group 2, amendment No 19, deals with sectoral plans for industrial processes. Again, that relates directly to what we were talking about with the utilities, the grid and the water infrastructure. Those things need to be joined together, done holistically — I hate to use that word, but I used it anyway — and in a way that means that it all works effectively together. <BR /> <BR />While the Climate Change (No. 2) Bill is obviously within the remit of the Agriculture Minister, the reality is that it needs to be cross-cutting for all of the Executive.”
“I would be delighted to get any commentary from you on what you plan to do about those areas as well.”
“What will we do to make sure that we have a utility, in this case Northern Ireland Water, that is capable of dealing with the significant waste water problem? What will we do to defend our low-lying areas? Many people in coastal areas can already see the impact of storms and other weather surges.”
“Thank you very much indeed for the intervention. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 21 looks at sectoral plans for infrastructure. We must address how we deal with the real challenges of waste water and storm surge rises. I want to hear the perspective of the Members who tabled the amendment. How will we protect our most vital infrastructure from storm surges and the likely impact of increased rainfall? Obviously, because of the serious underinvestment in Northern Ireland Water, we have to look at how we deal with the storm drainage water that is coming off the system. We are dealing with those problems right now. Yesterday, we saw reports that rainfall levels have already increased significantly. The climate emergency is with us now.”
“When we talk about amendment No 19 and sectoral plans for energy, I would like an expression of what we are doing to make sure that we have a grid and an energy system that are fit for purpose and under a form of utility regulation that will mean that we are not hampered by what, frankly, the integrated single electricity market (I-SEM) is trying to do, which is to make sure that Northern Ireland energy is not secure. In fact, it is being made an offshoot and is not being looked after effectively. There might be some real questions to ask about whether the Utility Regulator for Northern Ireland is the right person to deal with our future energy strategy and the problems of the climate emergency. Would it be better under Ofgem as part of the rest of our country's generating process?”
“Any legislation by the Assembly needs to be made in such a way that it is not counterproductive to what it aims to do. <BR /> <BR />First, amendment No 19 looks at sectoral plans for energy. One of the most significant issues that we have, of course, is that Northern Ireland does not have a fit-for-purpose energy system. We have real concerns about access to the grid; indeed, Mr John O'Dowd is putting through legislation that looks at small-scale generation. The problem is not small-scale generation; the problem is access to the grid. Both EirGrid and the Electricity Supply Board (ESB) have adopted a monopolistic position on grid supplies across Northern Ireland. Their positions are counterproductive and work against what we are trying to do.”
“In broad terms, we support the sectoral plans advocated by the Alliance Party. As I have stated, however, we would like answers to some specific questions, and I welcome the fact that the Alliance Party has made other Members available to answer those questions as we go through. <BR /> <BR />In general, it is obvious that we need to have sectoral plans to enable us to make sure that our economy is well suited to and ready to deal with the challenges of the climate emergency that is before us. I have outlined our real concerns about the likely impact, and those concerns have been echoed by the business community, the agri-business community, food manufacturers and small businesses. Whatever is in the sectoral plans, all MLAs need to be in a position where we can address the issues as we go through.”
“I thank the Member very much for giving way. I would like you to acknowledge comments from the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB), the business community, manufacturing, the agri-business sector and the food manufacturers. After yesterday's debate, during which we raised the issue of the 82% level on many occasions, they raised some really significant concerns. Although we, as a party, will support the sectoral plans, there are those real concerns. I would like you to specifically address what you will do to alleviate those fears and concerns.”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. As we know, climate change targets are likely to increase. If the CCC, or the IPCC, makes recommendations for tightening the requirements, will the Minister be looking to those? Will respecting the CCC's judgement be the driving factor?”
“Sorry. What would a just transition commission look like? How would that be developed against the idea of having a climate change commissioner or a climate change commission, which would be part and parcel? Do you propose a separate organisation or structure? If so, that would probably work against the idea of having a climate commissioner.”
“One, we need to recognise that there is a climate emergency. Two, we need to have an independent verification method under a commission and a commissioner. Three, we need to have realistic goals, which must be for better than 82% by 2050: if we do not do that, we are going to damage our economy. The final piece of the puzzle is that we must have a just transition. We must have a mechanism to make sure that our communities are not damaged as we make the necessary transition in order to deal with the climate emergency. <BR /> <BR />My friend, our agriculture spokesman, will talk specifically about the amendments as we go through the group.”
“As legislators, looking at the raft of amendments to the Bill, and because there are two Bills, we need to produce two climate emergency Acts that enable us to achieve our goals and objectives without fundamentally damaging our economy while we are doing so. <BR /> <BR />To be honest, I cannot think of anybody here who does not believe in a climate emergency or in the real challenges that we will have with the rise in temperature by 2°C by 2050, which, regrettably, is our direction of travel at the moment. We cannot be in a situation where we are not all working collectively to get to where we need to be. We can do that. That is why we should be bringing the best parts of both Bills together for achievable goals and deliverables. <BR /> <BR />Those achievable goals are quite simple.”
“The Federation of Small Businesses (FSB), the CBI and other members of the business community have called on us to make sure that there are appropriate mechanisms for a just transition, because the climate emergency is with us. What will we have to do to achieve that? We need to explore how we set up a situation in which we can have a just transition and are able to fund that just transition. <BR /> <BR />There are opportunities available to us as well. It is a question not just of what we are going to have to cut back on but of what we are going to have to develop. That speaks to the ideas around action plans and making them work as we go forward.”
“We note the Alliance Party's position on action plans. We will support those action plans because we need movement on where we are trying to get to. Those are key objectives. As legislators, however, we have to set out legislation that is achievable, that is not going to do more damage than good, and which will allow us to contribute toward net zero carbon by 2050 across our nation, the United Kingdom. <BR /> <BR />There are many aspects of the Bill — we will hear about them as we go through today — that will require a lot of discussion. We will encourage everybody to look at the wider picture in order to achieve our goals, aims and objectives. However, there are significant issues around those objectives as well. We need to understand what is meant by a just transition.”
“Thank you very much indeed for that question. I, too, think that our Health Minister has been absolutely brilliant in what he is trying to do; indeed, our Health Department has been extraordinary in dealing with very difficult circumstances. I am certain that every political party in the Executive fully supports the Health Minister in his aims and objectives. Here, however, we are talking specifically about the climate emergency and how we achieve the position that we need to get to. We have to set realistic goals. <BR /> <BR />There are other things that we need to do. We need independent verification, and, as a party, we will call for a climate emergency commissioner and commission. We need to see that, and we will support the amendments that set that direction as well.”
“<BR /> <BR />There are other things that we wish to see come through in the Bill. My learned friend our agriculture spokesman will talk about some of the amendments and what our position will be.”
“I assure you that I am definitely the real Ulster Unionist and the real Ulster Unionist Party. One thing that we reflected on was that we would talk to the business community; we would talk to the agribusiness community; we would talk to the farmers. We talked to those people, and they said, time and time again, that they would not be able to get into that position. Yes, I would have liked to have a more ambitious target, but we are a party that listens. Unlike other political parties, we go out and talk to communities to achieve that aim. We listened to what was said clearly by the farming community. We listened to what was said by the agribusiness community. Having been at COP26 and, in my previous existence, having worked with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), I know that it is about realistic goals.”
“<BR /> <BR />Our party's position is that we wish to support amendments to both Bills so that they read as closely together as possible, but the Bills should put us in a situation that allows our nation, the United Kingdom, to reach its net zero contribution by 2050 in such a way as to ensure that Northern Ireland's agribusiness and other sectors of the economy are not badly damaged. To us, that means that we need to be in a position to get to 82% or better by 2050. Our party will support the proposals made by the Minister for getting to that point.”
“It is useful at this point to set out the Ulster Unionist position on the Climate Change (No. 2) Bill and, indeed, the Climate Change Bill. Behind the scenes, my party and I have encouraged the sponsors of the two Bills to come closer together. To many people outside, there is a degree of absurdity about the Northern Ireland Assembly debating two climate change Bills when we should be debating one climate emergency Bill, because that is the situation that we are in.”
“The Minister is fully aware that, when the railway line makes its way up there, one of the more important areas for development should be the halt at Ballymartin. Will the Minister give an undertaking that, when she looks at feasibility studies for improving halts and rail connectivity, she looks first at something much closer and that has much more economic significance, particularly to the people of south Antrim and Ballymartin?”
“Will the Minister come with me to Global Point in my wonderful constituency of South Antrim? That is where we would like the terminus to be located for the Glider that will come through north Belfast, either along the Shore Road or another way. I would be delighted if she could come with me to meet the local business community and the council to discuss locating the Glider terminus at Global Point.”
“Just for clarification, Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom and is likely to remain so for a considerable period. Therefore, it is within the UK's target of 2050. My understanding, from being at COP26, from the conversations that I have had with the CCC and from my previous work with the IPCC, is that one of the few countries in Europe that is likely to make the 2050 target is, indeed, the United Kingdom. Why is Northern Ireland, where we are looking at 82%, being singled out to have a greater target to try to achieve that goal?”