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 34 of 50.
“Can the Minister also explain some other issues? I will be brief, Mr Deputy Speaker. I refer to the £35 million of reduced capital requirements relating to ICT projects in different Departments. Can the Minister advise whether there is a Department-wide problem getting ICT project money spent, as there appears to be? <BR /> <BR />Finally, can the Minister explain the allocations from the Treasury in respect of the £8·5 million for annual leave accrual in the Economy, Education and Infrastructure Departments? The reduction in the taking of annual leave in-year appears to coincide fairly neatly with the reduction in sick leave that the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA) has reported in the Civil Service in the first quarter of this financial year, coinciding with the lockdown.”
“That is particularly important in areas of health. Will such carried-over amounts be hypothecated as COVID-19, or will the Executive have full discretion in respect of their spending? <BR /> <BR />I welcome that the Minister is having discussions with the other Finance Ministers, but it would be welcome to have a statement from the Treasury sooner rather than later, if we are capable of doing this.”
“First, the Minister advised us of £200 million of reduced COVID-19 resource requirements and £100 million of non-COVID-19 reduced resource requirements. After all the allocations have been made, more than £346 million of resources are still available in what is the final monitoring round of the financial year. That is remarkable. However, this, of course, has been a remarkable financial year for all — unfortunately, for the wrong reasons. <BR /> <BR />Given the substantial sums left unspent, will the Department undertake another monitoring round before the end of the financial year, and will the Minister make a further statement on the other anticipated allocations in a timely manner? Can the Minister also advise on the likelihood of a substantially increased carry-over facility for unspent funding into the next financial year?”
“I thank the Minister for meeting me earlier today. Discussing how we will spend an underspend of close to £435 million in a very, very short time was probably one of the more unusual conversations between a Finance Minister and the Chair of the Finance Committee. <BR /> <BR />The Committee will welcome that all departmental bids have been met in full, including, in particular, a further £100 million for the COVID-19 localised restrictions support scheme, the replacement funding for the European social fund, the £20 million for the company directors' scheme, and the Treasury's capital funding for improved broadband through Project Stratum. <BR />There are, however, a number of features of this monitoring round that make it very unusual and worthy of deeper scrutiny.”
“I thank the Member very much for giving way. Looking at amendment No 34 and the use of official systems, I recall that one of the issues raised during RHI was that of unofficial servers. There had been attempts to move beyond the control of government communication systems, which are provided at considerable expense. They are equipped with the means to prevent their being hacked and with added levels of security, which should be of concern to everybody in the Government at the moment. Not only is this a matter of increasing accountability and transparency, it is a matter of increasing security and ensuring that our official systems, which should be the avenue for official government business, are used exclusively for the protection of us all.”
“I thank the Member for respectfully giving way. There are concerns with the TRIM system, which is the Civil Service's record-retaining system, and how it retains and accounts for records. The Minister might in his remarks refer to how the systems would be recorded, because there is considerable disquiet with the TRIM system. That might colour the Assembly's view on voting for the amendment.”
“Members may wish to consider whether amendment No 45 is in the spirit of those priorities and objectives. That concludes my remarks on the second group of amendments as the Chairperson of the Committee for Finance.”
“For example, the Committee for Health may welcome an allocation of £1 million in September monitoring to help support a particular need, but, if the Committee had not seen the original bid information, it would not know that the Department may have requested 10 times that amount, and it would never have known to ask the Department how it proposed to address the outstanding need in the absence of sufficient resources. Providing departmental bids to Committees is an essential part of the scrutiny process, as it is one of the few mechanisms for providing Committees with a detailed insight into the internal pressures in Departments. The Department of Finance's priorities and the Committee for Finance's strategic objectives focus, however, on the need for transparency and accountability.”
“As drafted, clause 13 would provide a legislative basis for what is currently happening in most cases, and it would ensure that, for in-year monitoring, the Committee's objective for openness, transparency and accountability is enshrined in legislation. Amendment No 45, however, would do away with that openness, transparency and accountability by removing the requirement for Departments to share information with their Committee prior to submitting returns to the Department of Finance. <BR /> <BR />In turn, that would mean that Committees would not receive information on where the pressures are in Departments and that they would have access only to information on successful reallocations to Departments.”
“rather than for Departments. That means that Committees should have the opportunity to receive oral evidence from their Department, including full details of proposed easements, movements and bids. That is an important part of the monitoring process, especially for bids for resources, in that it provides Committees with information on departmental pressures and the steps proposed to alleviate those pressures. <BR /> <BR />Generally speaking, the in-year monitoring process largely seems to have been working appropriately since the Assembly returned last year. The Committee has received only two complaints from Statutory Committees about Ministers failing to meet their responsibilities to provide complete and timely information to their Committee.”
“The current guidance is quite clear about what is expected of Departments as they engage with Committees on monitoring rounds. It states:”
“Guidance and in-year monitoring of public expenditure is issued by the Department of Finance each year, normally in advance of June monitoring.”
“One of the Committee for Finance's strategic objectives in our strategic plan is:”
“My remarks as Chairperson of the Committee for Finance in relation to group 2 relate solely to clause 13. That is amendment Nos 44 to 47 for those of you who are following it in your paperwork. <BR /> <BR />As clause 13 was introduced at Consideration Stage, the Committee did not have the opportunity to express a view on it. However, the clause relates to an area within its remit on which the Committee has a very clear view. <BR /> <BR />The Department of Finance's strategic priority 5 is to:”
“Thank you very much indeed. For clarity, when it came to the discussions about NDNA, many of the things that our party, in particular, asked to be included were not put on the table and, indeed, are not reflected in the document at all.”
“I am sorry. I apologise. I ask respectfully whether the Member will give way.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I think that it might be useful for Members of the Assembly to remind ourselves that, at the same time that we had officials from the Department explaining to the Committee that there was no need for any legislation and legislative process because normal processes and procedures would have seen things improve, or shortly thereafter, the Committee was looking to take opinion on whether we would have to compel the Department to give us information and advice. Do you consider that to be normal legislative process?”
“The best way to achieve that is through supportive and meaningful engagement at an early stage and throughout the legislative process. That concludes my remarks.”
“I welcome the Department's efforts to improve the drafting of the Bill, which will, if agreed, improve the wording and ensure that the legislation passed by the House achieves its intended aims. The Department could, however, have provided this support much earlier, as it was requested of it during Committee Stage. As for the suggestion that clause 6 is unnecessarily specific as originally drafted, the clause contains fewer than four lines of text. The amendment to clause 6 tabled by the Minister contains an entire page of text. It includes six subsections and is very specific in its intentions. Whether or not they support the legislation, Departments, Ministers and all Members have a duty and responsibility to ensure that the legislation passed by the House is clear, coherent and effective.”
“Now, however, at the final opportunity, the Department has changed its approach and no longer considers the drafting of the Bill to be:”
“The Department said that clause 6, on records of meetings:”
“The Department criticised the drafting of a number of clauses, yet, when the Committee sought assistance from the Department to help to improve the drafting, the responses received were less than helpful. They included statements such as:”
“Amendment Nos 16 and 17 to clause 4 should address concerns raised by some members at Committee Stage and, in doing so, resolve any issues that would otherwise arise should the legislation not achieve Royal Assent before 31 March. <BR /> <BR />In addition to the Minister and permanent secretary providing oral evidence to the Committee, Department of Finance officials attended on two occasions. The Department also provided responses to Committee questions on a number of occasions. Throughout this evidence, they referred to, reiterated and reinforced at every opportunity the view of the Minister that codes efficiently address the relevant issues and that legislation was not necessary.”
“Thank you very much indeed, Minister, for moving your amendments. The Committee for Finance considered written and oral evidence from a range of organisations and individuals, including the Bill sponsor, the Minister of Finance, the permanent secretary of the Department of Finance and officials from the Department's strategic policy and reform division. <BR /> <BR />Again, I thank all Committee members for their input and engagement during Committee Stage. I also offer my thanks, on behalf of the Committee, to the Bill sponsor, Mr Jim Allister QC, for bringing amendments to the Bill to address a number of concerns raised during Committee Stage by members, witnesses and other stakeholders. I welcome the fact that most of the amendments supported by the Committee passed Consideration Stage.”
“<BR /> <BR />I thank the Minister for his comments earlier, but I have already started engaging with other Committees to encourage their Ministers to look at this money and at the likelihood of any underspends this year to make sure that money is not going back to the Treasury. <BR /> <BR />Finally, there is obviously concern that, within the draft Budget, there is no provision for the victims' payment scheme or the Troubles permanent disablement payment scheme. The Minister has already given an explanation around why this is the case, but, bearing in mind that the courts have ruled that the Executive was obliged to make the relevant provision in this Budget, will he outline how we are going to get to that point? Thank you.”
“Minister, is there a danger that Departments will hand back COVID money in March, only to find themselves with Budget shortfalls in April? I know that the Minister is seeking flexibility from HM Treasury with regard to unspent COVID resources. Will he use that flexibility to fund a rates holiday for hard-pressed local businesses? I advise the Minister that the Committee strongly supports the full take-up of the £200 million per annum of the available reinvestment and reform initiative (RRI) borrowing. What measures is he bringing forward to make sure that Departments make the best use of that cheap form of borrowing?”
“I thank the Minister for the statement and for meeting with me earlier today to discuss its contents. The Finance Committee considers that Budget scrutiny is a primary foundation of good government that recognises the respective roles of the Executive, in producing a draft Budget, and Assembly Committees in undertaking and exercising their scrutiny duties. Notwithstanding the unprecedented events arising from the pandemic this year, the Committee is very concerned that delays in progressing the draft Budget will have a direct and very adverse impact on the scope for legitimate scrutiny and engagement with key stakeholder groups. <BR /> <BR />The Minister indicated that the Executive has received around £3 billion of COVID support from our nation's Treasury in the current year and that some of this money remains unspent.”
“I thank the Minister for her remarks so far. We have heard many across the House talking about the implications of the protocol and the processes involved in it. When calling for the use of article 16, it has been pointed out to us that there are other mechanisms to achieve what we want. Can the Minister give us some clarity on this? I believe that neither the Specialised Committee working group nor the Joint Committee working group has been set up. Therefore, there is no formal mechanism for dealing with this, apart from article 16.”
“I thank the deputy First Minister for her comments. North/South bodies, as laid out in the Belfast Agreement, are probably the most primary method of improving relationships across this island and these islands. Bearing in mind the comments about the shared island unit, what is the relationship between the bodies laid out in the Belfast Agreement, which are the things that we all should be supporting, and what seems to be an additional layer of bureaucracy increasingly mentioned by the Irish Government?”
“We should be reaching out to them and welcoming them with open arms. Perhaps the best way we can do that is to make sure that our hate crime legislation is rapidly brought into line with legislation in the rest of the United Kingdom.”
“I want the Assembly to call on the Justice Minister to action rapidly the changes needed to bring hate crime legislation in Northern Ireland in line with that in the rest of the United Kingdom. We cannot afford to allow our citizens, wherever they are from, or the most vulnerable who come to Northern Ireland seeking safety to feel as though they are being undermined or to be terrified in their own communities. Northern Ireland needs to be a place of refuge. It needs to be a place of tolerance. It needs to be a place in which we look at these people from the rest of the world and welcome them into our society. <BR /> <BR />Furthermore, anyone who has looked at our National Health Service will see that many of our doctors and other medical professionals come from these societies.”
“I thank Mr Carroll for bringing this matter before us today. I stand here as the chairman of the all-party group on ethnic minority communities and the leader of the Ulster Unionist Party, and we wholeheartedly condemn this racist attack on the most vulnerable in our society. <BR /> <BR />I want to raise the question of why hate crime legislation in Northern Ireland is not in step with that in the rest of the United Kingdom. As an Assembly, we should be pushing very strongly for the legislation, rules and recommendations of the Macpherson report to be brought in in Northern Ireland. This community, and all our communities, have been calling for that for some considerable time.”
“No. <BR /> <BR />— and environmental difficulties that will persist and will severely impact on an already much-COVID-damaged economy. Until we achieve the ability for Northern Ireland and its Executive to call for the triggering of article 16 to protect us from the forms of the imposition of the protocol, we should all, as Members of the Assembly, clearly call for the UK Government to trigger it today. The safeguards need to be implemented to secure our economy and to help us through these extraordinarily difficult times. <BR /> <BR />I ask the Assembly to support our amendment.”
“The only role that the Assembly has and that Executive Ministers have is to nod through and accept legislation and regulations set elsewhere. If that is not a definition of undermining the principle of consent as set out in the Belfast Agreement, I do not know what is. We as an Assembly, regardless of constitutional hue, must have a mechanism to call a stop to actions that we can already see are leading directly to serious economic, societal —”
“It is an EU/Boris Johnson-created potential economic depression. It is a potential disaster in the making, the full implications are only beginning to roll out, and we as an Assembly have no say in them. Before Christmas, I asked the First Minister at Question Time whether she or the deputy First Minister had raised these issues at the Joint Committee and, further, whether she had asked for article 16 to be triggered. She stated that that was the role of the EU and UK representatives. That is a failure of leadership. At this very point, we should all be pointing out the dangers ahead. As we in the UUP have pointed out time and again, this shows the massive democratic failure of the protocol. On the most important question on our economy post COVID, we have absolutely no say: none.”
“<BR /> <BR />The requirement for a level playing field to be maintained, whilst the stated aim of Brexit was to allow the UK to diverge, will also create a significant problem in that EU subsidiary state aid rules, to which we in Northern Ireland must remain aligned under the protocol, will negatively impact our ability to compete in the UK internal market and associated opportunities to fully benefit from inclusion in future UK free trade agreements. We can already envision support for our aerospace industry being challenged by the EU, along with the very necessary additional support that we will have to give to our airports and air routes as our competitors at Dublin Airport will have additional duty-free benefits that we will not. <BR /> <BR />This is not the best of both worlds. It is not even the least worst option.”
“The level of special sanitary and services checks that will have to be made on our major supplier of food — our own nation — are significantly more than those that are required of our Antipodean friends, again adding costs, and may significantly reduce supply. We are also seeing significant disruptions to our parcel trade right when, due to COVID, the e-economy has never been more important due to customs requirements that are not being required elsewhere in our nation.”
“EU requirements on approval, labelling and packaging will have to be met before those goods can be placed on the Northern Ireland market. That is particularly the case for product labelling and country NI identification marks, controls that few of our businesses are ready for, or are likely to be, for well over a year. <BR /> <BR />In agriculture and agribusiness, we have been told, by no less a figure than Michael Gove, that our sausages are safe for a maximum of six months. Taking aside the flippancy of his remarks, they highlight that, under the TCA, less generous provisions have been made for the UK than, for instance, between New Zealand and the EU.”
“Somehow, Boris Johnson stretched the truth again today by stating that the ECJ would have no role in the United Kingdom. Just who is he kidding? Neither the primacy of the European Commission or the ECJ is capable of being challenged by this Assembly. <BR /> <BR />I turn specifically to the trade and cooperation agreement (TCA). Let us take, for example, the bizarre rule that, through the TCA, goods going from GB to the EU, including the Republic of Ireland, will not be subject to customs rules for up to six months. Yet, in Northern Ireland, because of the Northern Ireland protocol, we are part of the EU customs zone, and customs formalities will apply to all goods moving from GB into Northern Ireland from Friday. <BR /> <BR />We will also have to apply controls over regulated goods, such as chemicals, food, automotive and medicines.”
“<BR /> <BR />On Friday, with the imposition of the Irish Sea border, we will be in a place apart; a new place that, as we approach our centenary, some in the Assembly will welcome as some sort of precursor of an economic island entity, ignoring totally the reality of the massive impact on our economy, people and democracy. These are the only factors that we, as MLAs, should focus on. <BR /> <BR />Indeed, who better to explain this than the DUP's own very recent best friends, the Conservative European Research Group (ERG), that stated only yesterday that:”
“<BR /> <BR />There are many flaws in the trade and cooperation agreement, not least that its provisions were to have ameliorated the worst aspects of the Northern Ireland protocol. Whereas the threat of tariffs have been removed for now, the non-tariff barriers are of such a degree that they will significantly distort business, agriculture, trade, security and not least how democratic accountability is provided for the people of Northern Ireland. Sadly, we have already heard from some that the Northern Ireland protocol needs to be made to work, as if it were some form of safeguard to the Belfast Agreement, when that is patently not the case.”
“I call on all parties across the Assembly to join us in calling for the UK Government to do what they need to, to put the people of Northern Ireland first and apply the safeguards laid out in the protocol because of the forthcoming depression that is likely to occur. <BR /> <BR />We call on both the UK and EU Governments to recognise that the so-called trade and cooperation treaty does not make Northern Ireland's position easier and the severe implications of the imposition of this unequal protocol treaty, and agree to derogate from the requirements to introduce many of its provisions for at least a year. The reasons and need for that are becoming abundantly and overwhelmingly clear.”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. Can she feed into the Joint Ministerial Council the fact that Northern Ireland haulage firms should be given a commitment that they will indeed be able to work unimpeded in Great Britain, the EU and Northern Ireland, particularly under the provisions of the protocol?”
“I declare an interest as the ex-chief executive of the British Irish Chamber of Commerce. The Minister talked about the success of InterTradeIreland, but the reality for many small and medium enterprises that have been involved with InterTradeIreland is that, in the past, it was seen to be especially bureaucratic and not particularly helpful in their development. Come 1 January, we will be through Brexit, and the protocol will be in place. Will she therefore commit to InterTradeIreland refocusing its present role of supporting the move towards Brexit to one of promoting Northern Ireland businesses, particularly those in the small and medium-sized businesses?”
“Thank you very much indeed, Minister, for your statement. I am aware that, in the past, Tourism Ireland has been accused of over-promoting Dublin Airport. Bearing in mind that the Northern Ireland Executive provide a third of Tourism Ireland's budget, what steps is the Minister taking so that at least our airports will be equally supported in the forthcoming years, as we deal with COVID and Brexit, as Dublin Airport seems to be? That seems to be an underlying, key element in what Tourism Ireland has been doing over the last couple of years.”
“I thank the junior Minister very much for making that comment. How does he know the clarity of this, bearing it in mind that, through the Joint Committee, we have not seen any of the detailed regulations and their likely out-turn as they come forward? Maybe the Minister could publish the detail of the particular part of the regulations where it refers to aquaculture. As somebody from East Antrim, he will be very aware of the impact that that is likely to have on one of our finest forms of food.”
“When the First Minister talks about article 16, can she envisage a time when the First Minister and the deputy First Minister, through the Joint Committee, could have a formal mechanism by which they could invoke article 16, rather than rely on the two co-chairs of the Joint Committee? Of course, as we are all reminded, one is from the European Union and one is from the United Kingdom.”
“I am sure that Members will recognise that the wider community and voluntary sector will be keen to access those funds to allow it to continue its vital work. In particular, when he discusses dormant assets, can the Minister tell us when we can expect to get some indication of what those dormant assets are likely to be and when we are likely to be informed of Northern Ireland's allocation of them? Given the potential for increased allocation, is there a likelihood that the level of funding each year could be subject to significant variation as we go forward?”
“I thank the Minister for meeting me earlier and briefing me on the contents of his statement. I welcome the statement. As the Minister said, Northern Ireland's share of the money has resided in the Department of Finance for many years and has not been put to use. Indeed, my very learned friend from East Antrim pointed out that it was 2008 when the issue was first raised.”
“That will have significant implications for everything that we do. The fact that we, as an Assembly, will not have any say on close to 136 areas of competency that will, slowly but surely, flow their way into what we are trying to do, should be a concern for all of us who believe in devolution and democracy. <BR /> <BR />That will be the approach that the Ulster Unionist Party takes from now on. We will closely examine every piece of legislation that is likely to be imposed upon us and ask ourselves these very clear questions: does it undermine the principles of the Belfast Agreement? Is it good for Northern Ireland?”