Alban Maginness
North Belfast · Social Democratic and Labour Party · Northern Ireland
“I look at the Justice Committee, which was mentioned yesterday during the Justice Bill debate, and see it as an exemplar of how people can work together, despite their political differences, and create a political consensus in order to make worthwhile changes in the justice system.”
“I hope that, as I leave this place and a new mandate starts, I can relinquish the function of alchemist and that we will have a new dispensation in which we can, in fact, create that reconciliation, because the Assembly was created as a forum for reconciliation.”
“— people used to ask me what I did. I said that I was a fireman — a political fireman who put out political fires. That is what we did for the first five years or so: we put out political fires. I have become redundant, or semi-redundant, in relation to putting out political fires.”
“There is, indeed, a dark shadow over the Assembly as we prepare for the elections. The attack on Adrian Ismay was not just an attack on a prison officer; it was an attack on the Assembly, it was an attack on the political process and it was an attack on non-violence and peaceful politics.”
“I thank the representative of the Commission for her kind words. I have enjoyed working with Karen McKevitt and, indeed, with the Commission. In the programme, will there be an emphasis on dealing with legislation, particularly draft legislation? It is a process that needs considerable skill and knowledge. Is that available?”
“On this legislation, he helped to put forcefully the views of the Committee to the Assembly, the Minister and the Department of Justice, and I compliment him on his work. It has been very positive.”
The complete record
Every one of 739 lines we hold for Alban Maginness, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 12 of 15.
“For many years, the British licence simply had the European logo on it. That, in our view, was sufficiently neutral in the context of our situation, in which, as the proposer said, symbols and identity are contested issues. Having a neutral symbol such as the European logo should satisfy most people in Northern Ireland because it does not offend anyone's national identity. It is simply an expression of our Europeanism and our membership of the European Union, which is very important to us and has brought us a lot of economic and social benefit.”
“I have listened carefully to the debate. I recognise the sense of concern raised by the Members opposite. My party and I understand their affection for the Union flag. I also recognise that the proposer of the motion emphasised two points. One was that everyone knows that flags and emblems are contentious. The second point she made was that identity — political or national identity, I assume — is important. I agree with both statements. <BR /> <BR />The fact of the matter is that this initiative was taken by a British Government at the Westminster Parliament on foot of the rather jingoistic surge in UKIP's electoral support. It was a response to that right-wing, anti-European, very jingoistic form of British nationalism. The British Conservative Government and, unfortunately, the Liberal Democrats agreed to this.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I just want to say that the European Union logo will remain on the driving licence. It does not disappear. It remains because it is part of the European directive in relation to driving licences, and that is a matter of law.”
“I welcome the general thrust of the Minister's answer, which certainly indicates sympathy with the whole idea of removing minor offences from young people's criminal records. Would the Minister support the idea of a multidisciplinary panel to look at more contentious cases? Would he be supportive of that general concept?”
“It is right that it should be done on an all-Ireland basis because the problems are common to both jurisdictions. It is right that the research be carried out. It is correct for the Minister to say that Mr Wilson's motion is utterly premature and ought to be rejected by the House.”
“No, I will run out of time. <BR /> <BR />Not only is his motion defective but so is his memory. I thank Mr Attwood for bringing that to the attention of the House. Scaremongering is irresponsible. I know that elections are imminent but descending to the level of frightening people in their own homes about a source of heat and fuel ought to be rejected by the House. <BR /> <BR />Air pollution is insidious. There are carcinogens in air pollution that affect people's health. According to a 2010 UK report, 500 people died in Northern Ireland as a result of air pollution. It is not something academic: smoky coal is a problem. It will not be resolved easily but it has to be addressed sensibly. That is why the Minister is right to wait for the report.”
“I will let the public judge them by their record on the green new deal. The green new deal would have transformed the situation for many thousands of homes throughout Northern Ireland by giving people energy efficiency in their own homes.”
“Perhaps if Mr Wilson had applied himself with the industry that he applied to this issue, we would not be in the position we are in. <BR /> <BR />There has been a sudden conversion on the part of the DUP to the prevention of fuel poverty. The DUP was the most obstructive of all parties in the House to the green new deal, which would have introduced measures that would effectively have eliminated fuel poverty by giving people fuel efficiency in their own homes, whether in urban or rural areas.”
“Mr Speaker, I congratulate you on your elevation and wish you well in your term of office. <BR /> <BR />First of all, this motion is clearly ill-judged and premature. It has also given rise, I believe, to substantial scaremongering and fear in many communities throughout Northern Ireland. I think that it is deeply regrettable, but it is also irresponsible coming from the Member for East Antrim. <BR /> <BR />The Member has raised a number of issues. He did so with great ingenuity, in order perhaps to divert attention from the self-evident flaws in the motion and perhaps to distract from his own failure in his term of office as Finance Minister. Mr Eastwood referred to the creation of a black hole in public finances.”
“— to get over the difficulties that they have created for themselves and to say that there must be a fresh start.”
“I think that it is time for the Minister and Sinn Féin —”
“That is why the amendment that the SDLP has brought forward, and which I believe will receive the support of the DUP, the Ulster Unionists and the Alliance Party, is preferable.”
“I go back to the original point that the Minister doth protest too much in relation to this. He knows that he is caught. He knows that he is caught by the commitment of his own leadership. Yet, he seeks to criticise the Budget. Yet, he seeks to try to ameliorate his own political difficulties by saying that it is the fault of other people. It is not the fault of other people; it is the fault of his own party's commitment to this Budget. <BR /> <BR />Mr Sheehan may be able to stand outside a school, protest against the cuts and seek to express solidarity with teachers and classroom assistants who are sacked. He may have the Minister's blessing and approval for doing that — I know that the Minister has said that — but that is not a truthful or honest position to adopt. It is disingenuous, to say the least, to adopt that position.”
“If the Minister has problems with the Budget, cannot support it because he cannot deliver an education system with it — it is clear from what colleagues are saying around the House that the education system cannot be delivered properly with this Budget — it will create all sorts of problems down the line, such as more poverty, and, as Mr Sheehan said so well in his speech, education is a weapon against poverty, then the Minister should say, "Well, I cannot do this job. Therefore, I give up this post. I resign".”
“If the Minister of Education is critical of his own budget, saying that that budget is inadequate, insufficient, imperfect or whatever way he wants to describe it, he is, in effect, the author of his own misfortune. That is the reality of the situation, and Sinn Féin Members have to come to terms with that. They, of course, look around and say, "Who is there to blame? Is the DUP to blame? Is it the Ulster Unionists? Is it the SDLP? No, it is not. It is the Tory Government at Westminster who are to blame". However, of course, the responsibility lies here in the Executive. The responsibility lies with Sinn Féin Ministers who supported this Budget. You cannot have it both ways. You cannot say that the Budget is wrong on the one hand and then still support it.”
“Those were his words. They were not my words but his words. The Minister of Education and his colleagues supported that view 100% with absolutely no dissent whatsoever. The Minister of Education voted for the Budget in the Executive.”
“I thank Miss McIlveen for bringing about the debate. I support the SDLP amendment. It has been a good debate. The education budget means that there are clearly very serious pressures on the education system, but you cannot have it both ways. The Sinn Féin deputy First Minister said that the overall draft Budget was as good as it could get and that anyone who believed otherwise was living in a "fantasy world".”
“I thank the Minister for his response. Can he assure the Assembly that, when it comes to the reallocation of funding for the Youth Service, he will pay particular attention to inner city areas where its beneficial effect is most felt?”
“I thank the Minister for his detailed reply. I hear what he says, but, if he looks at the situation in most schools, he will see that 90% of their money goes on staffing, and 10% is left for other things. Given the severity of the cuts, how can schools reasonably avoid cuts in their staffing levels? It is absolutely impossible, Minister. I ask you to respond to that.”
“I thank the Minister for his very detailed answers. I think that about 25% of the tower blocks are in north Belfast, so I have a special interest in them. Minister, in relation to the survey that has been carried out by the Housing Executive, will there be a focus on the type of tenancy in relation to the future tenancy in tower blocks? Will there be an additional concentration on energy efficiency in relation to tower blocks?”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. Will the Minister reassure the House and, indeed, those involved in nursing, particularly midwives, that whatever legislation is finally produced, the right to conscientious objection in the performance of an abortion will be safeguarded?”
“I thank the Minister for his detailed statement. I want to ask about the potential and very novel cross-border inquiry into sexual abuse and the transfer of abusers from one jurisdiction to another. At what stage are the investigations by the police into these matters? What level and what stage are they at? No inquiry can take place unless there is an evidential basis.”
“I thank the deputy First Minister for his very detailed report to the Assembly. He referred to indigenous companies and economic development. Will the deputy First Minister expand on the opportunities to work together on joint trade missions and on developing new markets? I think that it is crucial that that cooperation continues.”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. It is just on the point raised by Mr Wilson in relation to NCA. I know that the Minister would like to see the NCA fully endorsed by all parties in the House, including the SDLP, but will he agree that there are discussions ongoing in relation to the NCA — they may be drawn out, but nonetheless they are ongoing — around the whole issue of accountability, and once accountability has been agreed, the NCA should come into being in Northern Ireland with its full operational strength?”
“I thank the Minister for his detailed statement. It is important that there is cooperation between North and South on European funding, and his statement referred to collaboration. Will he expand on the type of collaboration that might be useful in drawing down additional European funds?”
“I apologise to her for not being present at the beginning of her speech, but I understand that she was critical of the Minister. Towards the end, she was equally critical because of his absence this evening. The Member should fully understand that it would be inappropriate for the Minister to attend the debate and respond to it, as it could be seen as prejudicing the process of the application. Therefore, I believe that the criticisms levelled at the Minister are, in fact, unwarranted. Either Mrs Cameron is being very naive about the matter or she — I hope that she is not — is being very mischievous regarding the Minister's absence. I stoutly defend the Minister in his decision not to attend the debate. It would be inappropriate and could be prejudicial. Therefore, I think that he has taken the right decision.”
“If it is not sustainable, even leaving aside all the environmental objections, all the objections by residents, and all the fears over health and all the rest, the project is not sustainable, is fundamentally flawed and should not go forward. It should not receive approval. <BR /> <BR />We as a region are right to adopt a process in which we will deal with residual waste. That is necessary and proper, and we have to prepare for that. I think that we have the capacity to deal with that and, in due course, that it will be dealt with, but I believe that it will not be satisfied by the particular project before the House as a matter of discussion in this Adjournment debate. <BR /> <BR />I thank Mrs Cameron for initiating the debate and for bringing it to the attention of the House.”
“If you were to take 50% of that for recycling, composting, and so on, you would reduce that figure down to a quarter of a million tons. However, you have to add on a 100,000-ton allowance for combustible commercial and industrial (C&I) waste, which means that the total waste available for thermal treatment within the Arc21 area would be around 350,000 tons per annum. <BR /> <BR />As other Members rightly referred to, the planning approved for thermal treatment capacity within the Arc21 area at Lisburn and Bombardier right now is approximately 300,000 tons. Therefore, it seems, at least based on the mathematics of this particular project, that there is no sustainability in the short or medium term or in the long term. That goes to the very heart of the project.”
“In addition, we have issues with the procedures that Arc21 has gone through. I am not going to delve into those, but, even if you were to remove all the other objections and magic them away, you would still have one very substantial argument at the very heart of the application, and that is the sustainability of the project. I do not believe that it is sustainable in the medium term or in the long term, if 30 years is regarded as long term. <BR /> <BR />It is clear from the figures that we know about that over 900,000 tons of waste has been collected by local authorities in the past year. If you were to take the present project and the Arc21 area, that would absorb roughly 55% of that, which would bring you to about half a million tons.”
“The others are the scale of the plant, which seems to be extraordinarily big in all the circumstances; the inadequate road network; the inevitable adverse impact of an increase in traffic; and, of course, the visual impact, which the Member who just spoke referred to. There would be a 95-metre chimney, which, in fact, would be seen for many, many miles around. It would have a serious impact on an area that is in the countryside and is, in my view, of considerable scenic value.”
“As the fifth Member to speak in the Adjournment debate, I think that there is very little meat left on the bone, but I will try my best to produce some. If I reiterate what other Members have said, it is simply to emphasise the point that there is cross-party consensus on this application. It is clear that all parties in the House, certainly the Members who have spoken, are opposed to the application. They are at one with the local residents, who are very opposed to the site and see it as a threat to themselves, their children, their homes and the basic amenity of the area in which they live and that they enjoy. They are entitled to that. <BR /> <BR />A number of issues were raised, one of which is location.”
“— the commission. Is that not a terrible waste of resources that the Assembly could have used to build a good legislative body in the House?”
“I thank the Minister for his answer, but he misses the point in this. It is not really just that the report into defamation has been delayed and may not be completed but that the Law Commission is an important outworking of the criminal justice review. At the stroke of a pen, the Minister of Justice effectively abolished —”
“I thank the Minister for his detailed response on the application. Does he agree with me that the social value of the application outweighs, in many respects, the value of retaining the buildings due to their townscape character and that this is indeed a worthy project? Does he also agree that, in such circumstances, planners should take the view that the application should succeed?”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. I am not asking the Minister to name his adviser, but did he seek and receive alternative legal advice? He seems to indicate that the advice was contrary to what the Attorney General said. Could he clarify that?”
“The Minister said that he had had some discussions with the Attorney General, but he also said that he had received alternative advice. Could he outline whom he received that alternative advice from?”
“I cannot speak for my party, but only as an individual Member, because we have not had an opportunity of discussing this particular issue. However, I accept what Lord Morrow has said: that this is effectively a tidying-up amendment which has the Attorney General's support and weight behind it. Given that, I would prefer to support it rather than oppose it.”
“I support the amendments in this section. I also thank the staff of the Justice Committee for their work, which was, at times, very difficult and complex. They did a great job and I would like to put on record, as an individual member, our gratitude to the staff. <BR /> <BR />These are tidying-up amendments. It is important to emphasise the support that will be given to people who wish to leave prostitution, and that given to people who have been involved in human trafficking. It is very important that we show that support as a society. <BR /> <BR />There are obviously some question marks over amendment No 10. As I understand it, the Attorney General has advised that particular amendment as a tidying-up of the Bill in relation to this aspect. It is preferable that we follow the Attorney General's advice in this matter.”
“Yes. That is the point that I was trying to make, perhaps imperfectly. Nonetheless, it is important that we avail ourselves of the opportunity of using the UK commissioner. In relation to our situation in Northern Ireland, I would have preferred a local person. Nonetheless, I think that this is the right way to proceed, and it is a very important function that we keep the situation here under control and under supervision. This, I believe, is the best way of doing so in the present circumstances. It may well change in the future, and it is open to us to review it at some stage in the future, but, at this time, I think that this is the best way forward. For those reasons, we will be supporting amendment No 44. I believe that the House should support amendment No 44 as being the best way forward in all the circumstances.”
“However, I think it is clear that having a Northern Ireland rapporteur, although desirable, would not be a great use of resources or public moneys. Given the extent of our problem and given the functions that a local rapporteur would have to carry out, it is therefore, I believe, preferable to use the office of the UK commissioner with an extensive remit to Northern Ireland. That is the right way to proceed with this. We will get value for money; it does not, as far as I know, cost the Department here resources or cost it financially —”
“<BR /> <BR />I also have to say that the Committee worked very closely with Lord Morrow and helpfully added to the debate around the Bill and helped to perfect the legislation before the House today. <BR /> <BR />Group 2, in many ways is a further honing of the various clauses to make sure that they are fit for purpose and essentially waterproof against challenge. I think that these further amendments are helpful in doing just that, and I welcome them. <BR /> <BR />I understand some of the concerns expressed about amendment No 44. I certainly, initially, along with other colleagues, took the view that it would be better to have a specific Northern Ireland rapporteur to deal with the various issues that need to be addressed that arise from human trafficking and from this Bill.”
“First of all, I pay tribute to Lord Morrow for bringing this Bill to the House and the work that he has put into it, which was enormous — one individual dealing with very detailed and, at times, complex legislation. It faithfully reflects the European directive on human trafficking, and he has done us all a great service by bringing the Bill, steering it through the Assembly and working very closely with officials in the Department of Justice. Of course, despite some differences, the officials, the Minister and the Department of Justice worked together with Lord Morrow, and I think that it is a good example of the Assembly working together. It might be a rare example but is, nonetheless, a good one that should be noted by those who watch our proceedings in the Assembly.”
“I thank the Minister for her answers. Given the fact that we have a huge fund of €80 billion in Horizon 2020, and that there is other extensive funding, does the Minister agree that there needs to be a review, perhaps not immediately, but, say, mid-term, of our funding targets so as to maximise the European funding at large that is available to industry and business, and to people in Northern Ireland generally?”
“The Member raises a point in relation to the SDLP amendment, but if the stocktake report, and everything arising out of it, were fully implemented, my party and I believe that that would provide enormous security to prison staff and prisoners. There would be no compromise in relation to the safety of any staff or the security of the prison. Our amendment is in that context.”
“One of the points made by Mr Bunting and his colleagues was the importance of the prisoners' forum for communication, in order to get the agreement fully implemented. Does the Member agree that that is a good aim and should be achievable?”
“— saved from the worst excesses of cuts, and I hope and pray that the current positive situation that has been achieved in Roe House will be built upon and that we can do a lot better in the next six months.”
“<BR />I know that some concerns have been expressed about the level of manpower in the Prison Service, but, at this point in time, it is not critical. I hope that the Prison Service will be —”
“Indeed, the response from the Northern Ireland Prison Service has been very positive in relation to the report and in its attempt to create a situation in which the 2010 agreement can be fully implemented. <BR /> <BR />I also note the points that have been made in relation to staffing levels in the Prison Service. I think that it is important that we look at them. It is important that staff feel safe and secure, and that prisoners feel safe and secure and that they have access to educational services, to work, where they can, and to proper recreational and leisure activities. It is important that we focus on those things, but I believe that the Department of Justice and the Northern Ireland Prison Service are intent on reviewing all those matters.”
“I think that that is a very important contribution to the debate today. We have to see the report in the context of trying to free us from some of the ghosts of the past that continue to haunt our present. <BR /> <BR />It is very important that all of us in the House take that report seriously and, at least, give it a chance so that it can create a new dispensation that is positive for everyone in the context of Roe House — staff and prisoners — and, in addition to that, wider society, because, if the situation in Roe House deteriorates, there are bound to be political consequences outside and a ripple effect throughout society. We know that from experience, and we cannot ignore it. <BR /> <BR />We should move on from the report and try to build on the good work that has been done by those people.”
“They went on to state that communication was essential in the process. They put tremendous emphasis on the creation or the maintenance of a prisoners' forum and said that forum could be chaired by an independent chair, such as an official from the International Committee of the Red Cross. That is an important contribution in understanding and trying to improve the situation that exists in Roe House. <BR /> <BR />I want to emphasise that they also went on to state that they believed that there should be:”