Robbie Butler
Lagan Valley · Ulster Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“Officials highlighted that alignment was provided through existing EU-derived arrangements and that coherence with existing regulatory frameworks was identified as a main consideration.”
“I note that the Member for Strangford agrees: she understands the value of our fisheries in those areas. There are other complexities. The Isle of Man Government have now done a bit of a circle around that island, which makes it difficult for our fishers from Portavogie, Kilkeel and Portaferry to craft and graft a living from some of the…”
“The Committee took the opportunity to question officials on several issues and highlight matters warranting scrutiny at Committee Stage but was not limited to those areas.”
“As the Minister said, they have possibly been viewed as competing demands, but they are not competing demands, because clean water is part of sustainable food production.”
“<BR /> <BR />I am glad to see language in the Bill on the sustainability of the aquaculture sector, and I want to lean in a bit on that. Aquaculture pastimes have, perhaps, been underutilised, whether they relate to the angling fraternity or other river and water users.”
“Today, I want to talk about a very talented young girl from Lisburn called Freya Terris. Freya, who is 17 years old, attends Friends' School and studies the piano under former Lisburn resident Rory Dowse. Freya is an incredibly accomplished young pianist and has performed in the Ulster Hall.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,636 lines we hold for Robbie Butler, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 53.
“I understand that we have a devolved Assembly and can make up our own minds, but there are certain things on which I do not like to lag behind my brothers and sisters in England, Scotland and Wales. However, alignment with other jurisdictions cannot be the sole basis for legislation. The Assembly must ensure that any law passed here is precise, proportionate and workable within the particular context of Northern Ireland's rural communities and countryside practices. At its heart, this debate is and must be about balance. It is possible to support stronger animal welfare protections whilst recognising the legitimate realities of rural life. It is possible to oppose cruelty whilst supporting lawful pest control, biodiversity management and sustainable countryside practice.”
“I thank the Member for his question, and I thank the Bill's author for his answer. <BR /> <BR />The debate on this matter in 2021 was one of the more lively ones. If any of you were here for the debate, you will know that there were impassioned speeches and excellent questions. That debate pointed to the fact that, when we want to do it properly, we can. The points that I have outlined are not attempts to undermine the Bill. Rather, they are essential questions to ask if the Assembly is to produce legislation that commands public confidence and avoids unintended consequences. <BR /> <BR />We acknowledge that Northern Ireland remains the only part of the United Kingdom where hunting wild mammals with packs of dogs has not been prohibited. As a unionist, I genuinely struggle with that.”
“I get the point that you are making, and I would like it to be addressed.”
“I will make this point, and then I will. <BR /> <BR />I know only too well about the landowner's perspective. In Lagan Valley, the only hunting incidents in which I have been involved were ones in which hunts had gone across farms and lands that they were not permitted to. Farmers got together and lobbied their local politicians in Lagan Valley to ban hunting because they had no control over the hunts going over their land.”
“In particular, with your indulgence, Mr Speaker, I seek further updates from the Member today, if he has any, on how the exemptions in article 23F will operate practically. The Member will know that the threshold of "more than two dogs" jumps out at me, because I have conversed with him about it. What evidence supports that figure, and how will that be captured to ensure that, when there is more than one person present, it is very clear that, rather than being just two dogs, it is two dogs per person? If the Member has evidence of how he came to the threshold of two dogs, that would be really useful. How will "reasonable steps" be objectively assessed to ensure that dogs do not become a pack, as Mr Frew pointed out? What constitutes sufficient evidence that permission has been granted by a landowner? I know only too well —”
“We would like to know whether the Bill sponsor intends to introduce a clearer mental element, such as intent, recklessness or knowledge, to ensure that inadvertent conduct is not criminalised, and how he will ensure that enforcement agencies are engaged so that the provisions are applied consistently across all our rural communities. Those are reasonable and necessary questions. <BR /> <BR />Supporting the principles of improved animal welfare legislation does not remove our responsibility to ensure that legislation is workable, proportionate and enforceable in practice. Indeed, a number of concerns have been raised through stakeholder engagement over the past number of weeks. It is entirely proper that those matters be rigorously examined.”
“We would like to know how the Bill sponsor intends to address concerns about legal certainty, particularly regarding the broad definitions of "participation" in article 23A and "searching" and "pursuing" in article 23B. We seek further clarity on what constitutes a dog "under control" for the purposes of the exemptions under article 23F; on what potential evidential threshold will apply in determining whether a lawful countryside activity has crossed into criminal liability; and on how the legislation will ensure that the accidental or incidental flushing out of wild mammals during lawful activities does not become subject to prosecution.”
“We need to ensure that any legislation that we pass is subject to the highest levels of scrutiny and legal testing. We need to get it right first time, so that we do not have to return to the Chamber, hold our hands up and say, "We got it wrong". <BR /> <BR />I will make a few points for the Bill sponsor to pick up on during his winding-up speech. The Ulster Unionist Party seeks to understand how the Bill will clearly distinguish between unlawful hunting with dogs and lawful hunting to gun that is carried out for food or legitimate pest control purposes. We would like clarity on the safeguards that will exist to ensure that ordinary dog owners, rough shooters, gamekeepers and those engaged in lawful countryside pursuits are not inadvertently criminalised.”
“biodiversity. <BR /> <BR />The Ulster Unionist Party recognises and welcomes the fact that the Bill does not seek to eliminate all forms of lawful pest control or countryside management. However, our support for the principles of the Bill is qualified by the need for robust scrutiny and clear legal certainty. There are legitimate questions that must be addressed to ensure that lawful rural activities, responsible dog ownership and those who hunt to gun or for food are not unintentionally captured by overly broad drafting. The Bill sponsor must provide absolute clarity on how those provisions will operate in practice. When we make legislation in the Chamber, we do so sometimes with a lack of experience, because we are not here often enough to make really good legislation.”
“We recognise the intention of the Bill, which is to prohibit the organised hunting of wild mammals with packs of dogs, while attempting to preserve exemptions for legitimate land management, pest control and animal welfare purposes. Under proposed article 23B of the 1985 Order, the Bill would create offences relating to hunting wild mammals using dogs and organising or participating in such activities. Importantly, however, the Bill also attempts to recognise practical countryside realities through a series of exemptions. Under article 23F, exemptions are created for the management of wild mammals above ground where the purposes include:”
“In many cases, they are among the strongest advocates of conservation, habitat protection, responsible stewardship and wildlife management. The question before the Assembly is not whether wildlife management is necessary — it is — but whether the hunting of wild mammals with packs or a number of dogs remains an acceptable and proportionate method of achieving those aims in a modern society.”
“<BR /> <BR />From the outset, it is important to acknowledge plainly and honestly that vermin control and wildlife management are necessary components of rural living. Farmers, gamekeepers, land managers and rural communities face genuine challenges in protecting livestock, safeguarding biodiversity, preventing disease and managing species populations responsibly. We see that with badgers at the moment through the many debates that we have had in the Chamber. Nothing in this debate should diminish those responsibilities, nor should anyone suggest that those who work closest to the land are somehow indifferent to animal welfare. As the Chair of the AERA Committee, that has not been my experience when I have spoken to farmers, rural dwellers or land managers.”
“Members agreed to consider the matter further in their respective parties and to convey their positions during the debate, which, with your indulgence, Mr Speaker, I will now do as the Ulster Unionist spokesperson for all things relating to agriculture, the environment and rural affairs. <BR /> <BR />The Ulster Unionist Party is broadly supportive of the principles underpinning the Hunting with Dogs Bill. We do so from a position that is grounded absolutely not in hostility towards rural life, farming, shooting or legitimate countryside management, as some may try to frame it, but in a belief that animal welfare legislation should reflect the highest ethical standards expected of a modern society.”
“I thank the Member for his question. That very question arose in the 2021 debate, which I will reference when I speak as a private Member. The Bill sponsor has possibly offered some reassurance in that regard by stating that there have been zero prosecutions in other parts of the UK under equivalent legislation. I do not want to speak for him, however. I am sure that we will return to that point later in the debate. <BR /> <BR />The Committee recognises that the aforementioned issues will require consideration should the Bill proceed to Committee Stage, in which there is likely to be considerable public interest, which there is already, as my phone has been dinging today. Thank you very much, Mr Blair. <BR /> <BR />At its meeting on 23 April, the Committee did not take a position on the Bill's general principles.”
“The Member also reiterated that the Bill is focused on the use of dogs in hunting wild mammals and does not extend to other activities, such as shooting or angling. <BR /> <BR />The Committee is aware that a number of stakeholders have raised concerns about the Bill's impact on farming practices, predator control, livestock protection and biodiversity.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee took the opportunity to query a number of issues with the Member, including how enforcement officers would distinguish between a dog walker and someone engaged in hunting activity; how the legal position for someone who was shooting with multiple dogs would be interpreted by police; and how the distinction would be made between trail hunting and drag hunting, including whether drag hunting represented a viable alternative. The Member indicated to us that dealing with such matters would depend on the facts in each case, with enforcement officers being responsible for assessing the evidence. He emphasised that the provisions are intended to ensure that the legislation is effective and not undermined through the exploitation of potential loopholes.”
“<BR /> <BR />Having sought an amendment to the Dilapidation Bill for a reporting and review clause, the Committee is pleased to note that clause 12 of the Hunting with Dogs Bill requires that the Department review the operation of the legislation at least once every five years. <BR /> <BR />The EFM indicates that the Bill does not give rise to any direct financial implications. It may place additional demands on departmental resources and on the PSNI to undertake inspections and enforcement, but fines arising from offences may contribute to offsetting enforcement and compliance costs.”
“The Committee noted that clauses 6, 7, 8 and 10 provide exemptions for hunting rats and mice; for managing wild mammals in specified circumstances, such as preventing crop damage or controlling disease; for relieving the suffering of wild animals; and for training dogs to follow an animal-based scent where doing so is lawfully permissible. <BR /> <BR />The Committee noted that clause 9 permits the use of dogs under certain conditions to search for dead wild mammals. We noted that clause 11 seeks to amend the 1985 Order to provide for the enforcement of the offences created by the Bill and that clause 13 states that the Bill will become law six months after receiving Royal Assent.”
“Clause 4 creates an offence relating to terrier work. <BR /> <BR />Clause 5 amends article 27 of the 1985 Order to set out the penalties for the offences introduced in the Bill.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee considered the Bill's 14 clauses and noted, first, that clause 1 introduces a new Part 3A into the 1985 Order to create offences relating to the deliberate hunting of wild mammals with dogs, including involvement in such activity. Clause 2 introduces a new provision that captures direct involvement in hunting and the organisation of, or participation in, such activity where one or more dogs are used, along with a related offence where a landowner allows such activity to take place on their land. We noted that clause 3 establishes an offence in relation to trail hunting, which is defined as the use of dogs:”
“<BR /> <BR />The Member outlined that the purpose of the Bill is to prohibit the use of dogs to hunt, attack or kill wild mammals, and to address potential loopholes, including where trail hunting may be used to mask illegal hunting. It was also highlighted that the Bill provides for a number of exemptions to allow for the legitimate use of dogs, including for pest control and the protection of livestock. The Member further advised that the Bill does not address other forms of hunting, such as drag hunts or those involving firearms. We heard that the Member conducted an initial consultation from 21 October 2024 to 20 January 2025, alongside engagement with a range of representative groups. We heard that the majority of respondents supported the objectives of the Bill.”
“I rise initially as the Chair of the AERA Committee and, on its behalf, welcome the opportunity to speak at the Second Stage of the Hunting with Dogs Bill introduced on 27 April 2026. <BR /> <BR />The Committee was first made aware of the Bill sponsor John Blair's proposals in May 2025 and received an introductory briefing on the Bill at its meeting on 23 April 2026. The Committee wishes to place on record its thanks to the Member for his engagement thus far. The Committee understands that the Bill is intended to amend the existing Wildlife (Northern Ireland) Order 1985, to bring the position more closely in line with legislation across the UK jurisdictions, including Scotland, as previously outlined by the Member.”
“<BR /> <BR />Ultimately, the report should be utilised to shape a more joined-up, preventative and person-centred anti-poverty strategy that is focused on —”
“It was good to see in the earlier debate about the allocation of moneys that £16 million is being allocated to employability. Preventative investment will improve lives while helping to reduce long-term pressures elsewhere in the system. The debate on holiday hunger reflects that clearly. Whether people view the legislation as workable or not, the issue is there, and it is a valid debate in which we will engage. <BR /> <BR />The report is also right to call for a genuinely joined-up approach across government. Poverty does not fit neatly into one Department and certainly not the Department for Communities on its own. Housing, health, education, childcare, transport and the economy — to mention a few of the issues — are all interconnected policy needs. We really need to accept that reality. Things need to change.”
“The failure to tackle poverty properly does not result in the problem disappearing; it simply creates greater pressures elsewhere, particularly in our health and social care system. That is a really important point, because there is a direct link between poverty and poor physical health, poor mental health outcomes, social isolation and educational attainment. Fuel poverty, poor housing and financial stress all contribute to worsening outcomes and increase pressure on individual families and already stretched public services. That is why we need an invest-to-save approach that is focused on prevention and early intervention. Investment in housing, childcare, employability, transport and poverty measures should not simply be viewed as expenditure or expensive.”
“Public debate should seek to reduce division and stigma, rather than contribute to it. Good anti-poverty policy should not be about drawing lines between people or suggesting that some forms of hardship matter more than others; it should be about recognising need, reducing poverty and ensuring that people are treated with dignity and supported during difficult periods in their life. One of the strongest themes running through the report is that too much of the current response remains focused on crisis management and firefighting, rather than prevention and tackling root causes. I know that the Minister has stated that tackling those root causes is a priority for him and the Department. <BR /> <BR />We cannot continue waiting until people reach crisis point.”
“There are others who are not in work due to ill health or disability or, crucially, due to caring responsibilities. We must never overlook the role of our carers, particularly young carers. It is really important that we support them. Difficult life circumstances and personal pressures can place an enormous burden on some individuals and families. That is important, because, too often, commentary can become overly simplistic and political points can be made when, in reality, as the previous debate on baby loss certificates highlighted, poverty pervades every community in Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />It is imperative that those in positions of responsibility be careful in their approach to poverty and hardship and in the language that they use. The issues affect real people, real families and, often, sensitive personal circumstances.”
“That predominantly sits with older people, single-parent families and individuals with disabilities who cannot work. Crucially, it really incapacitates parents, who find themselves each summer worrying about how they will get their kids back to school and how they will feed them over the summer. We have had to battle for summer activities for special schools here. The list goes on. <BR /> <BR />The report is also right to highlight the growing issue of the working poor. Many people experiencing poverty are already in employment but do not have a high enough wage to meet their mounting bills. The reality is that poverty can affect people in a wide range of circumstances. There are people who work hard every day but still struggle to make ends meet.”
“The Ulster Unionist Party welcomes the report and the engagement that led to it that was carried out by the Communities Committee with councils from across Northern Ireland. What comes through clearly from the evidence is that councils already deal with the realities of poverty every day. We know that, we see it, and we hear it from our council colleagues throughout Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />As we have heard, poverty is not a nuanced issue. It has been discussed in reports, but it is more than statistics. In reality, it is families struggling with the price of food, and we know about the one-way trajectory of the price of food at the moment, given the geopolitics in the Strait of Hormuz. The price of fuel and oil is an issue that we face almost annually because of our dependence on oil, and there are further escalating housing costs.”
“<BR /> <BR />I hope that Members will reflect on the fact that this is not a gotcha moment; this is about asking for the Irish Government to step up to the plate, deliver what we would demand of our own Government in London and bring closure to victims who have suffered.”
“If we do not address the past honestly, with full disclosure, we will, unfortunately, arm the terrorists of the future, because we will legitimatise what they do. We need to get to the point of truth, and those who need to lead the way are the British Government and the Irish Government. The parties that will not support the motion or the amendment are basically saying that we have a two-tier system that allows the Irish Government to drag their heels when it comes to the information that they have and, in some instances, the collusion involving an Garda Síochána. I am delighted that Mr Wilson shared his experience of what it was like to live on the border. There were decades of terrorism. It was not something new. The experience of those who lived on the border was very different from that of those who lived in towns.”
“Thank you. <BR /> <BR />I wrote to Justice Minister McEntee a number of years ago, when I held the role of my party's deputy leader and Chief Whip. I was not satisfied with her answer. The Irish Government play with words. To this point, there has not been any discernible action on what happened. <BR /> <BR />The Member for North Antrim talked about the Enniskillen bomb. We want to talk about the Omagh bomb. I also want to talk about what will happen if we do not address this issue. Our respective Governments need to step up and set the pace, but, sadly, the Irish Government are lacking in that regard. What has happened since 1998? Two more prison officers have been murdered: Davy Black and Adrian Ismay. That is not to mention the PSNI officers who have also been murdered. Officers are still under threat.”
“Many people suffered and lived in fear. However, what has happened since 1998?”
“I think that you deliberately did not speak about that part, because it is absolutely indefensible. <BR /> <BR />Some excellent points were made during the debate. I do not want to pick out too many victims' names because some of the cases are incredibly sad, but I do not like to go beyond trying to get people to understand that those who served did so without fear or favour. I was a prison officer for a number of years: 32 of my colleagues in Northern Ireland were murdered. Brian Stack was a prison officer from the Republic of Ireland who was murdered by the Provisional IRA. There has been no justice and no truth. The Irish Government need to step up to the plate and walk in parallel with the UK Government, which is what we should do. Anyone who has information or access to the truth should tell that story. It was a dirty war.”
“Everyone whom I have worked with in the Chamber says that they want justice and truth, and that they do not want to equate victims with those who perpetrated violence. Well, on the last one, it is most of us, maybe not all. What I did not hear anyone on the opposite Benches pick out from the motion or the amendment was the second piece, which was:”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Sometimes, when we debate in here, our motions can be pulled apart. This is one occasion when the motion has been misrepresented by my MLA colleagues on the other side of the House. What was the purpose of tabling the motion? It was not to attribute blame or to retell or rewrite who did it worst or who did it best. It was about demanding more of the Irish Government, because it is very, very clear to anyone who is looking on that the Irish Government have not been in step. <BR /> <BR />I am not going to make an excuse on behalf of the UK Government, because they have previously got it wrong. I am not going to make any excuses for anybody who wilfully acted outside the law.”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. It is right and proper that I raise the issue in this place at this time. At the weekend, the Minister was at the Balmoral show. As we did, he will have talked to farmers and people in the agribusiness sector about the pressures that are on them. The Minister mentioned TB compensation. <BR /> <BR />How important is it that we have a multi-year Budget? What doors would that open and what security would it give to the farming community, who are facing untold pressures at this time?”
“In his answer to the tabled question, it seemed that the Minister was apportioning blame to the Committee for not passing the SR in the limited time that we had. <BR /> <BR />Minister, do you accept that, in reality, the AFBI report and science relate to Strangford lough? That is what the evidence relates to. You wanted to put a ban on periwinkle gathering across the shores, up the eastern seaboard of Northern Ireland, when, in fact, the science tells us that, due to global warming, the water is getting warmer and the periwinkles are moving north.”
“We really need to, collegiately, work together to lobby Treasury and the UK Government to take some meaningful action in that regard. <BR /> <BR />I urge anyone who did not make it to this year's show to get it into your diary for next year, because it is the premier event in the agri-food and farming sector across these islands.”
“I am not sure that there is another industry in Northern Ireland that provides such a wide variety of skilled and valued jobs. <BR /> <BR />Last year's Balmoral show happened against the backdrop of the introduction of the dreaded inheritance tax, which, even after the changes, still looms over our family farmers in Northern Ireland. This year, the backdrop to the show was further pressures for our family farmers, namely the geopolitical instability that has led to the rise in fuel prices. Why should that matter to us? It matters because, if it is not resolved and if the Treasury in London does not take action on fuel duty in particular, we will see rampant "foodflation". People have become used to working out whether to heat or eat in winter but that option may not even be there, because "foodflation" could run ahead of itself.”
“<BR /> <BR />As many of you will know, having been there — I saw many of you at the show — the weather was slightly inclement, so I want to put on record my thanks, not only to the RUAS staff but to all who contributed to making the show such a successful event, whether that was Lisburn and Castlereagh City Council, the PSNI or the many volunteers, particularly those who stood outside in that inclement weather to direct pedestrians or direct traffic to parking spots. <BR /> <BR />Over the four days, there were many opportunities for many of us to engage not only with the public and our constituents but, very importantly, with the farmers and food producers who underpin what has been quantified as a £7·3 billion a year industry that provides over 109,000 full-time equivalent jobs in Northern Ireland.”
“I want to pay tribute, as I am sure many Members will want to, to the Royal Ulster Agricultural Society (RUAS), which is based in Lagan Valley, on a very successful Balmoral show. I was delighted that the show moved from the King's Hall at Balmoral to Lagan Valley. That has worked out to be one of the greatest successes in platforming our farming and food industries and allowing people who live more in urban areas to mix freely with those who are the mainstays of what I consider to be the most important indigenous industry here, namely farming and food production.”
“A parent or family of a child with autism, who understand that that child is going to need support, should have an Executive, an Assembly and even an Opposition who will say, "We're going to provide and develop a pathway right through, so that you will have the comfort of knowing that your child is going to grow into adulthood with the best opportunities possible". I thank the proposers of the motion and the amendment for the opportunity to speak on the issue today.”
“<BR /> <BR />I say this to those parents and young people: do not give up hope. Keep the pressure on us. We get paid to bring about change and to see the Executive working in a collegial way, rather than being brought to the brink on items that are political but do not affect people's lives. There are priorities to which we should put our shoulder to show people that we value them and that this is a place that cares about all of them. <BR /> <BR />We will be moving into an election phase shortly, guys. I am sure that every party will be looking at its manifesto. I urge each of the Members and all the parties represented here to consider the fact that we have taken one small step with the Autism Act and the Autism Reviewer, but we need to move into post-19 provision.”
“I do not think that anybody will disagree with my next point, but the amendment points to it a little bit. In this situation — I am going to use the word "consensus" — if we had the Education Minister, the Economy Minister and, possibly, TEO here to understand the complexity of this arrangement, we might achieve consensus. A child born with autism will have autism when they die. What does that mean? When we talk about giving every child the best start in life, what do we want to do next? We want to give that child the best educational experience that they can have. What do we want to do then? We want to give them the best opportunities post-19. Unfortunately, however, we are a wee bit disjointed and fragmented. That is what true cross-departmental work would look like.”
“We have inherited some of those failings, but, if we do not change the tone and the intent, we will become facilitators of them. I acknowledge the legislation that came through and the appointment of the Autism Reviewer. The review and the report have been very useful in bringing a focus.”
“Members may remember that, between 2018 and 2020, there was a horrendously long tail of undiagnosed autism, and parents were fighting tooth and nail to get diagnoses. It was not just the system, however; it was a cultural attitude towards autism. <BR /> <BR />We need to be guarded. Last year, in the Chamber, I talked about some of the utterances that had been made. Yes, they were from the USA, across the pond. President Trump and, I think, RFK Junior were literally calling into question whether autism was a real thing and suggesting that there was overdiagnosis and medication of it. If we are not guarded, we could allow the culture to shift here. It could become a blame culture — blaming parents — when, in fact, we have report after report of failings.”
“<BR /> <BR />I pay tribute to those who work in the space of autism support, whether they are in the medical profession, the teaching profession or the community and voluntary sector, because they have held back the wave of pressure that parents and young people have faced when, many times, a system that was not really designed for them has left them high and dry. In our constituency offices, we have sat with parents who have literally been tearing their hair out because they did not know what the pathway looked like from early diagnosis to interventions and, crucially, into the long term. <BR /> <BR />I have had the privilege of serving on the all-party group on autism. I was also on the Committee for Education at a critical moment. We need to learn from the mistakes of the past. There was a review of the Education Authority (EA).”
“Yes, that was bad timing, but I will draw an analogy from the SDLP Member's coming in on this side of the House: it validates what Cheryl Brownlee said about the debate being not really a debate but a consensus. I was not going to speak on the motion, but it is rare that we have an Alliance motion to which the TUV has tabled an amendment and we are all agreeing. What a moment. If I were the parent of a child with profound autism, I might get a wee bit excited about that and would probably think that things were going to change overnight. Unfortunately, as we know, the wheels of change turn slowly here.”
“Year after year, we come here to talk about the need to agree a Budget, and we now have the opportunity to agree a multi-year Budget. If we come into this place in 2027 — if we are returned by the electorate — and have failed to agree a Budget, we will be complicit in the further deterioration and degradation of our services, which has been significant. I ask all Executive parties and, indeed, the Opposition to consider the geopolitical instability and the pressures that we all face, to look at the levers that we have here, to be grown up and mature and to get around the table and agree a multi-year Budget.”