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 41 of 50.
“Indeed. If one looks at the history of the social democratic movement and the labour movement, one will see that there has always been an implication of providing state aid and making state aid available on the occasions when we wish to do that.”
“<BR /> <BR />From looking at some of the other issues that we have, it is clear that we have not seen any information on the trader support system.”
“<BR /> <BR />We will hear many times over forthcoming weeks, as we hit problems with COVID and the implications of trying to get business and manufacturing back together, about what we need to do for our aerospace sector, which will need state aid, what we need to do for our life sciences sector, which will need state aid, and what we will need to do for agribusiness and even things such as fintech. Those areas need to be sorted out. One of the things — I hope that Lord Frost and Michel Barnier are listening to some of the elements of this debate today — that we need to see is a level playing field across the United Kingdom to make sure that we are able to deal with the problems of COVID and with what happens after 1 January next year.”
“There is an expression that we need to be aware of, and it is the idea of a level playing field. There is much discussion across Europe about whether the United Kingdom will be working on a level playing field with the rest of the EU. It is fundamentally important for the people of Northern Ireland to know that they are on a level playing field with the rest of their country. As has been said many times, our largest trading partner is the rest of our nation. It is not just a matter of us sending goods to GB or GB sending goods to us: it is equally important that we make sure that, when we come to issues relating to state aid, Northern Ireland is not disadvantaged.”
“The Ulster Unionist Party will support the motion and the amendment. <BR /> <BR />Members of the Assembly will be very aware of the discussions that have been ongoing, particularly about the Northern Ireland protocol and the much-vaunted press release that was out yesterday and the potential impact that that has on Northern Ireland businesses and consumers.”
“Thank you very much. Of course, many of us will remember the events, I think, of 2 and 3 October 2019, when a certain political party — the DUP — and its leadership were embracing the idea of a regulatory border down the Irish Sea. Can you explain how you have had this change of heart and, indeed, how you have this change of heart apparently in your party at this moment in time?”
“May I make a declaration of interest? Along with the Minister, in previous guises, I have stood on the platform for No Arc21 and believe very strongly that this incinerator is nothing more than a Ponzi scheme. <BR /> <BR />Bearing in mind the length of time that this has taken, will the Minister outline the costs that have been accrued by the taxpayer for the considerable amount of ongoing legal activity since one of her predecessors made it very clear that this project should not go forward? Will she furnish those costs directly to the Assembly so that we can review whether this has represented good value for money by her Department or, indeed, anybody else?”
“I thank the Member for South Belfast for bringing forward the Matter of the Day.”
“To have Northern Ireland, in some way, managed by a specialist Joint Committee, with the implications of that, is not democracy. Again, Members of the Assembly should push against that. <BR /> <BR />My party will continue to call for clarity, both from London and the EU, on the necessity to make sure that our businesses and consumers are not disadvantaged by the deal. If we get to the point, regrettably, where there is no trade deal between the United Kingdom and the EU, what is left for Northern Ireland should not create disadvantage for all of us. If that is what the discussions are about — again, I must emphasise that we have not seen them — it is appropriate that we see that. <BR /> <BR />Again, Mr Speaker, I apologise for not being here for the start of the debate.”
“If the discussions come to fruition and bring more certainty about what is in or is likely to be in the protocol, particularly with regard to goods at risk, the level playing field or any of the raft of issues that will affect Northern Ireland significantly come 1 January 2021, we need to be in a position to act. If that means that the EU and London Government actually sit down and agree what those changes are likely to be and how they will be made so that they do not affect Northern Ireland, every political party in the Assembly should push for that and try to make it happen. <BR /> <BR />There is another issue here. We keep talking about the implications of the deal for the Belfast Agreement. We need to emphasise that the Belfast Agreement is about the principle of consent.”
“I apologise for not being in the Assembly earlier for the Matter of the Day. <BR /> <BR />In many respects, coming to the Assembly to debate a matter that is, frankly, press speculation at this stage shows the degree to which it is unsettling to many people across Northern Ireland and beyond. One of the most interesting things that we have to deal with is the fact that many items and parts of the Northern Ireland protocol are disadvantageous to our businesses and consumers and very disadvantageous to the economy as we go forward. <BR /> <BR />The Ulster Unionist Party has always stated that we do not want to see any borders north, south, east or west. However, we do want to see free and open access with the rest of our country, which is our biggest trading partner. That is what we want to see.”
“Thank you very much indeed. We will support the motion.”
“When that went to the algorithm to be run through the computer, the universities used what the teachers said, based on their best professional judgement, to get the qualifications, but CCEA used the merit ranking system. We do not know any more details about that because, a bit like the emails about PPE that have mysteriously never arrived, it seems to be some form of secret.”
“I know that we do not seem to hold anybody accountable or responsible for anything in Northern Ireland, but, on this occasion, somebody must be held accountable and responsible for what has happened to our students, to our parents and to our teachers. <BR /> <BR />In my last minute, I would like to talk about teachers. Teachers were asked, because of COVID and all the difficulties that there were, to use their best professional judgement. They were asked to look at what grades their students were likely to get in their AS levels and A levels. They were told that they had to be especially rigorous and to look at everything in significant detail. They had to make sure that everything that they did in their process was rigorous. They were also asked to look at a merit order of where pupils sat in their various subjects.”
“<BR /> <BR />This did not come out of the blue, given what happened in Scotland, where the Education Minister there, even though they had been given advice two weeks beforehand that it would be a substantial problem, realised that that was the case and did a U-turn. The fact that we had to wait so long for a U-turn to occur has meant that there are students right now who do not even know whether they will go to university this year. Some had already received a conditional offer but cannot go now. Students who had received a conditional offer and were about to go to university do not know whether that will be overturned or potentially overturned by some form of judicial process. This has been a fundamental failure.”
“There are substantial questions of leadership here that must be answered. Our party will join in the process of asking to make sure that there is a full and thorough investigation of this. <BR /> <BR />Some fundamental questions need to be asked, and I want the Minister to answer them. We know that our universities ran a model in July to look at the likely number of students that they would have. It used A levels, AS grades and teachers' predictions. It was fundamentally different from the model that CCEA was using. Why were the alarm bells not ringing at that stage, Minister? Why were your special advisers and members of your Department not saying that there was something fundamentally flawed and wrong?”
“We have known for many months that the situation was going to occur. Indeed, as we have heard, we probably spent a considerable amount of money with PwC in creating an algorithm to look at these problems. This did not happen over just one or two days. This happened over a considerable time. <BR /> <BR />We are in a situation here in which the Assembly is being asked to look at a system that, until the changes happened on Monday, meant that our young people would have been significantly disadvantaged, not just for now or for the coming year but for the rest of their life. I am at the tender age at which I am still asked, if I put my name in for a board or a board position, what my A-level and GCSE results were. I did not do AS levels. That is an example of the implications of the problems that we have had in Northern Ireland.”
“I join my party members in welcoming you back. I also say to the SDLP that John Hume was, indeed, a colossus on the Northern Ireland and global political stage. His advice and guidance will be very much missed by our party as well. <BR /> <BR />Many Members have talked today about the implications of what has happened with the A-level debacle and fiasco. I do not wish to join in an attack on and criticism of the Education Minister. It is vital that we get to the bottom of what happened. The first thing, which our learned friend from South Belfast talked about, is the importance of the need to recognise that we are in the midst of a COVID pandemic. We are not in normal times. However, despite the fact that we are not in normal times, we have known all along that the GCSE, AS and A-level results were going to come out.”
“Just for clarity. Was it PwC that was paid £100,000?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Those of us who are Committee Chairs will have seen a letter from the Minister of Finance that suggests that in the region of £35 million may be available in-year. So, maybe, if we are looking for a collegiate, cross-Executive approach to deal with the problem of a cap on university places, all the political parties here today could commit to using that money.”
“Can the two junior Ministers assure the Assembly that, when this revision of the ministerial code comes forward, there will not be any form of accelerated passage on the discussions?”
“The crux of the discussion so far has been about the ministerial code. If you have gone to the bother of rushing through this Bill via accelerated passage, there must be a draft ministerial code out there that you are expecting to come through. Can the Minister therefore publish that draft ministerial code so that all MLAs can have a look at it and decide where this needs to go? From what we have heard today, that is something that we at least need to see from the Executive.”
“This is important. We have already had discussions about the internal workings of the Northern Ireland Executive. We have already had discussions about privileged Executive information — legal information — that we do not have sight of. Are we in a situation whereby two parties are trying to use the situation to demonstrate that they will use the internal information of the Executive, which is supposed to be confidential, for this debate, when the conventions are that they must not do that? For clarity and the record: it is a mandatory coalition. It is not a normal democratic situation. The Ulster Unionist Party has a seat in the Northern Ireland Executive because of the Belfast Agreement. That is why we are there. That is why.”
“I thank the junior Minister for giving way. He has alluded to planning decisions that are in the process of coming through. Many Members have asked for guidance from either him or the other junior Minister on what some of those planning decisions may be. Will he give us some information on that, which may help us to make up our minds around the debate?”
“Sorry. My apologies. The planning process is the problem. It is not about giving ministerial authority for it; it is about the planning process. Why are we introducing bad legislation that will not even deal with the problem?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. As the debate has gone on, one of the key things that we have seen is that it is about the planning process. The planning process needs to be —.”
“No, eloquent. You are never getting "elegant". <BR /> <BR />The real issue, ladies and gentlemen, Members of the Assembly, is that this is bad legislation. In the future, when this comes back, which it will, and creates enormous problems, we will have to ask ourselves, with our conscience, whether we had the ability to stop this bad legislation at this stage. Or are we going to go through another whole rigmarole that is going to create all sorts of impediments to the future good governance of Northern Ireland? It will probably not even make sure that we get the York Street interchange built on time. We need to have good legislation. We need to have good scrutiny. We may not have made the amendments yesterday, but the Ministers still have an opportunity to delay this process so that we can look at the Bill properly.”
“Christopher is very eloquent, and I quite enjoy his interventions.”
“Do we really seriously say that we will allow the so-called smartest lawyers in the room to set the agenda? This is all that I have heard. I have heard everybody say that we need to agree with this because the best legal minds, from the government lawyers to the Attorney General, tell us that it is the right thing to do. We do not have to go back very far in the Assembly to see the last time that we had lots of advice and guidance from departmental solicitors and where that led us to. That should be the touchstone that we look to as we go through. <BR /> <BR />Finally, how does the Bill actually give us clarity? I have not heard anything from any Ministers or from any of the more eloquent people from the Back Benches.”
“I thank the Minister very much indeed for doing that, but his intervention continues to raise fundamental questions about why this is bad legislation and a bad law. I am sure that the junior Ministers, when they are briefing the Assembly at the end of this debate, will talk fairly clearly about the definitions that we require for significant, controversial and cross-cutting. Maybe we will also get an update on the proposed new ministerial code because, indeed, junior Ministers, we are being invited to agree this legislation before we even know what the proposed changes in the ministerial code are. <BR /> <BR />I will conclude fairly shortly. We do have a choice. We, as Members of the Assembly, can meekly accept bad legislation, which the Ulster Unionist Party will not be doing.”
“Thank you very much for that intervention.”
“<BR /> <BR />How does the Bill respond to the challenges of our unique legislative system? This was introduced to sort out a planning issue in a series of planning issues. My honourable friend from South Down has said this on many occasions: what is the rush? Indeed, my honourable friend Mr Muir said that some planning applications have been in the system for more than 650 weeks. One of the great things about being a submariner is that I am quite good at mental maths, and that shows that these planning applications have been in the system since long before the Assembly was shut down for three years and long before Buick. There is something more fundamentally wrong with our planning system than was going on with Buick, and I am not sure that this legislation in any way is going to address those fundamental issues.”
“<BR /> <BR />I ask the First Minister and the deputy First Minister these questions: how does the Bill help to restore trust in the Northern Ireland Assembly? Does it restore openness and transparency? Does it address the democratic deficit? They should ask themselves very clearly whether any of those questions have been answered. <BR /> <BR />There was a note in one of the newspapers asking whether MLAs are "incurious" and "inept". I am quite insulted by that, because I am not incurious. I might be inept in some things, and I do not think that people in the Assembly would consider that to be the case. However, there is a real issue here. We have a precedent of legislation coming through the Assembly that has brought this place into disrepute, and, Members, we are doing that again.”
“I thank the Member from South Belfast. He must have been reading my notes, because those are, indeed, the very words that I was going to discuss now. Not only do we not have any view of what the updated ministerial code will be like, we need to understand clearly the definitions of the words "significant", "controversial" and "cross-cutting". We talk about improving clarity for Ministers, but when are we going to see this information so that we are able to assess whether it is appropriate to test whether this law is good law? We have not seen that. If we look back at some of the things that happened in the past and at some of the reasons why the Assembly did not sit for three years, we can see that that lack of scrutiny has been very clear.”
“He mentioned the three Ministers rule and how that will be referred to in the ministerial code. However, we have been informed that there is going to be an update to the ministerial code. We are being invited to look at this legislation before we know what the changes to the ministerial code are going to be. Indeed, where New Decade, New Approach is concerned — like many others in the Chamber, I sat through hours and hours of turgid discussion behind the scenes in Stormont House and beyond — we still have not seen the updated ministerial code. Being asked to take this legislation through on the basis of something that we have not seen smacks again of the RHI inquiry and some of the issues to do with that.”
“We also know that many of the reforms that were mentioned in and were supposed to be part of New Decade, New Approach have not yet been brought to the fore or actioned. Here we are in a situation where we are looking at a piece of bad legislation, with the impact that that will have. It will have an impact not just this year but next year and in the years to come. As some of the learned Members who have been here much longer than I said, we will be dealing with the implications of this not just in the short term but in the medium and much longer term. Many MLAs need to reflect on that. <BR /> <BR />Mr Lyons referred yesterday — this is quite important — to three key issues about the checks, balances and controls, and that is one of the main reasons why this is bad legislation.”
“You talked extensively about the legal opinion from the Departmental Solicitor's Office to the Executive and the views of the last Attorney General. We fully accept — it is a pity that Mr Stalford is not here — the fact that privileged information to the Executive is, indeed, privileged and should not be subject to further discussion. We do, indeed, welcome the offer that you made yesterday that the solicitors will be available to brief us in more detail. It is just a pity that, in the 11 minutes that the Committee for the Executive Office took to decide on the Bill, there was not the opportunity to get some more guidance and advice, particularly on the legal aspects. <BR /> <BR />We know that, because of the unique situation in Northern Ireland, our party is in a mandatory coalition.”
“As I look around the Assembly, I am reminded, if we look back in history, of when RHI was being debated in the Assembly. Even though there are reduced numbers here due to COVID, the number of Members who have been able to take part in this debate on what is, quite frankly, bad legislation is particularly disappointing. I do not wish to make this into a moment where we harangue each other on particular issues, but there are some significant issues here. The first question, and we have not had the answer, is: why this legislation and, more particularly, why now? <BR /> <BR />Mr Lyons, thank you very much indeed for your very fulsome description and your briefing when we were talking about the amendments yesterday.”
“I thank the Minister, his Department and the healthcare professionals for all their hard work. Will the Minister outline how he has managed to deliver the globally unique, functioning, pan-border StopCOVID NI app? Will he also thank the software industry for its hard work in delivering the app? It is indeed, Members of the Assembly, a unique thing that we are seeing across these countries.”
“The specific issue, Mr Deputy Speaker and Members of the Assembly, is how can we ensure that proper planning decisions are made in an appropriate time, not moving away from the position that we are in at the moment and not taking away checks, balances and controls. <BR /> <BR />I could speak for much longer, and you are probably glad that I am not going to. I could talk about the Democratic Unionist Party's history lesson, which, I must admit, I really enjoyed. Thank you very much indeed for that. It will be used in the future for people to look at this, but this is not an issue about people from outside of here. This is about making sure that we have good legislation, openness and transparency. Members of this House, I commend the amendments to you.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Ulster Unionist Party tabled the amendments because we want the legislation that goes through to be specifically based on dealing with the Buick issues on planning. The Bill, as it is being put through at the moment, does not do that. It is about making sure that we have the appropriate checks, balances and controls. <BR /> <BR />We have heard a lot about St Andrews, and we have heard about the Belfast Agreement, but one of the reasons why Northern Ireland, to use the words of the soon-to-be-leaving head of the Northern Ireland Civil Service, is seen to be unique is that the normal checks, balances and controls do not work. We have to make sure that, when we are doing the legislative process, we have good legislation that comes through that addresses the specific issue.”
“One of the biggest problems that we have in Northern Ireland is responsibility and accountability and openness and transparency. I welcome the talk about the ministerial code, which has not been updated yet. I welcome the fact that we are going to have definitions of significant and controversial. We do not know what those are and what those are likely to be. We are being asked specifically to take the Bill on the basis that the ministerial code, which we have not seen to be amended, will be amended .We are being asked to accept the Bill on the fact that we need to put some balance and trust on the words "significant" and "controversial". We see the word "cross-cutting", and cross-cutting is good, but when will we see the rest of the detail?”
“So, when somebody says to me that they have the best legal advice and that, in some way, we, as Members of the Assembly, should accept that because the Bill is some form of good legislation, I say that the reason why we have tabled the amendments is because it is not good legislation. It does not seek to set out what we are trying to right, which are the problems with planning, infrastructure and Buick. It does something fundamentally different, and many Members have referred to that in their comments today. <BR /> <BR />I want to talk about some of the specific points. The question is this: is the Bill good legislation? The mere fact that a party that is part of the Executive is challenging the legislative process shows that it is not good legislation. Why do we think that this is not good legislation?”
“What is the rush to bring the legislation through, where it is quite clear that there is a degree of doubt in the process as we are coming through? We have heard Member after Member talk about the fact that we should take more time to consider it. <BR /> <BR />We have heard quite clearly from the junior Minister — thank you very much indeed for your comments — about the importance of the legal position and the fact that you have had the best legal advice, but, Members of the Assembly, they had the best legal advice when we were dealing with RHI, and where did that come to?”
“I fully understand the views of everybody else here that we want to get the Northern Ireland economy going. I fully understand that the planning processes in Northern Ireland are, to put it mildly, archaic and are really counterproductive to trying to get Northern Ireland going. The legislation needed to enable the Infrastructure Minister to make those decisions is something that we as a party and, indeed, all the parties here want to see. This Bill, if it is not amended, is not that legislation. Mr Wells asked this question, as did Mr Stalford and others in oblique ways: what is the legislation supposedly trying to do?”
“I thank everybody who came in for the debate. It will come as no surprise to find that I am coming to support the amendments. Let us quickly go slightly further back into the history of this. I will bring in a few of the catch-alls that everybody has been commenting on. I declare an interest as an MLA for South Antrim, and I do not want to see the Arc21 Ponzi scheme being built on top of a cliff face in that constituency. <BR /> <BR />I do not believe that any of the decisions on Arc21 have been correct. The Buick case was a long-running process that exposed the problems that were based on the planning decisions that were made going forward. I fully understand the Infrastructure Minister's frustrations about trying to get decisions going.”
“Just to clarify for the House, I was re-tweeting something by a Mr Austin Stack. We all, in the House, know Mr Stack's relationship with the republican movement.”
“Both you and the Finance Minister should have done the decent thing and resigned.”
“The deputy First Minister and the Finance Minister have both failed. You have failed to uphold your own rules and guidance, and you have failed to uphold your own pledge of office, but, unforgivably, you have put your own narrow party interests above those of your constituents. It beggars belief why neither of you can see that and why you still feel that you deserve to be given any respect or credibility by not just this Assembly but especially by the family and relatives, particularly of those 554 people who are deceased and the many thousands who have suffered from COVID. Your arrogance and the way that you have spoken to the people of Northern Ireland and this Assembly is insulting. It has undermined the very health and safety of our nation, which is, indeed, the primary responsibility of leadership. You have failed.”
“Deputy First Minister, do not take my word for it. A member of the clergy in my constituency put it much better than I ever could when he said:”