Alex Maskey
West Belfast · Sinn Féin · Northern Ireland
“First, I thank the Minister for making an absolute pledge of non-interference by him as the Minister of Finance. I note that he has asked others to do likewise.”
“I think that it has been made very clear that you can legislate, set up institutions and all the rest of it within a particular framework, but, if people chose and choose not to embrace the principles and concepts, it will not work.”
“I appreciate that the Member was not here last February, so she had no role in the last discussions, but she needs to be aware that her party voted against the proposal to close the scheme in February 2016. That is the reality; that is a fact.”
“Over the last number of years, we have all been challenged in the things that we had to do and in the agreements that we had to reach and were challenged to adhere to. Nevertheless, when people have worked in the spirit of partnership and sharing power, this place and this and previous Executives have produced much better work.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I really did not want to interrupt, because I know that he is passionate about the points that he is making. If I remember correctly, the Ulster Unionist Party leader said a couple of months ago that, if the Good Friday Agreement was up for debate now, the party would not support it.”
“A Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle, I also wish you well in the time ahead as a republican activist. <BR /> <BR />It is fairly ironic in its own way that, in the last hours of this Assembly, we are debating the principles and values of the Good Friday Agreement.”
The complete record
Every one of 704 lines we hold for Alex Maskey, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 15.
“First, I thank the Minister for making an absolute pledge of non-interference by him as the Minister of Finance. I note that he has asked others to do likewise. I may have missed it — I apologise if I have — but I have not heard any other party, as yet, saying that, if one of its members becomes the Minister of Finance in a future Executive, they will adopt the same position of non-interference in any way whatsoever. I have not heard that and, if possible, I would like to hear that. <BR /> <BR />Yesterday, the Assembly considered a plan from the Economy Minister to save a figure of somewhere in the region of £30 million — it was certainly less than that — out of the total of £490 million. Will the inquiry be able to examine the efforts of the Department to contain the overall costs?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I really did not want to interrupt, because I know that he is passionate about the points that he is making. If I remember correctly, the Ulster Unionist Party leader said a couple of months ago that, if the Good Friday Agreement was up for debate now, the party would not support it. I hope that all the parties will come back here, as I have said previously, with a commitment to delivering on the Good Friday Agreement. Our problems are not because we had the Good Friday Agreement; they are because we have not fully implemented the agreement. Is your party still committed to the Good Friday Agreement? If we could get that consensus in the Chamber tonight, it would be a good start.”
“— implement the agreements, we will serve the people far better.”
“They are positive mechanisms. We appeal to all the parties that come back after the elections to embrace the spirit of partnership. If we sit down together — it is not about having a whole new negotiation — and simply work to —”
“No, thank you. I do not have that much time, Chris. Sorry about that. <BR /> <BR />The fact of the matter is that the petition was a safeguard, but people are now using it as a veto — in other words, as a block to other people's rights. Once you start using it to block other people's rights, that is a complete and utter flagrant abuse of its use. People need to return to what the petition of concern was about. It was about protection, and it was one of the mechanisms intended to make sure that one community or one set of parties does not abuse or discriminate against another.”
“<BR /> <BR />In recent times, there has been an increasing abuse of the likes of the petition of concern, which, as I said, was built in as a safeguard to make sure that, if there was sufficient concern that mustered the marshalling of 30 signatures, that denoted that there was a serious problem that needed the matter under discussion to require cross-community support.”
“Over the last number of years, we have all been challenged in the things that we had to do and in the agreements that we had to reach and were challenged to adhere to. Nevertheless, when people have worked in the spirit of partnership and sharing power, this place and this and previous Executives have produced much better work. When people work together having embraced the concept of sharing power rather than simply trying to divide it out, this place has produced much better results for the wider public and for society as a whole. It is when people resile from the concepts of sharing power, treating people with respect and affording equality to other citizens that we become not fit for purpose and not fit to be in position.”
“I think that it has been made very clear that you can legislate, set up institutions and all the rest of it within a particular framework, but, if people chose and choose not to embrace the principles and concepts, it will not work. Coming from a divided society that has been in conflict for generations, you cannot expect the garden to be rosy all the time. That is why safeguards and checks and balances need to be built in. That is why we have mechanisms such as the petition of concern and mutual vetoes, which, when used on a positive basis, are about requiring cross-community support on key issues of governance. <BR /> <BR />The fact that some will abuse the petition of concern does not mean that it is not a necessary mechanism for a whole range of issues.”
“Fortunately, all the other parties involved in the all-party talks, both Governments and, more importantly, the people, in referenda across this island, voted overwhelmingly to endorse the Good Friday Agreement. <BR /> <BR />Sinn Féin and I would argue that all parties, all participants and all communities made major compromises to agree to the Good Friday Agreement and to subsequent agreements in the ensuing number of years. We would argue very clearly that we are working under the auspices of the Good Friday Agreement. We are very disappointed that many key elements of it have not been adhered to over the last number of years, and my colleague Gerry Kelly referred to a number of those.”
“Alongside that, and, maybe, at times, more importantly, power-sharing and the concept, principles and values of the Good Friday Agreement have not been adhered to by parties in here. I am speaking in particular about the DUP. It was interesting to listen to our colleague Pam Cameron, who, in fairness, acknowledged that the DUP, for whatever reasons — whether we agree with them or not — has difficulties with power-sharing. We agree that the DUP has difficulties sharing power. The DUP, to its credit, opposed the Good Friday Agreement. It never supported it and did everything it could to thwart it. That was its position, which it was entitled to have.”
“A Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle, I also wish you well in the time ahead as a republican activist. <BR /> <BR />It is fairly ironic in its own way that, in the last hours of this Assembly, we are debating the principles and values of the Good Friday Agreement. On behalf of our party, I hope that, when we come back after the elections, people apply all of themselves to the full implementation of the Good Friday Agreement. Quite clearly, part of the problem and part of the reason why we are where we are today is the very recent financial scandal around RHI, which is at the end of a long list of other financial scandals that have brought public confidence in the institutions to an all-time low.”
“Your Minister was in the Executive. What did he do? Nothing.”
“I appreciate that the Member was not here last February, so she had no role in the last discussions, but she needs to be aware that her party voted against the proposal to close the scheme in February 2016. That is the reality; that is a fact. You can say all you want about it, but you and the Ulster Unionist Party voted against the closure of the scheme, despite repeated warnings about the cost that would be accrued and lost to the public purse. Your party voted against closing the scheme. Simple fact. You cannot get round that. I know that you were not here at the time — neither was Justin — so it is not your fault, but your party as a party, and other Members who are still here and were here last year, voted against the closure of the scheme.”
“At least acknowledge that the money was made available.”
“— this party and the other party across the House, whether we liked it or not —”
“— could not force the British Government to backtrack, but —”
“Those people identified the best way of protecting the most vulnerable from that pool of money of over £500 million. <BR /> <BR />The Member talks about the 34,000 people. Other parties here have lamented the situation over the past number of weeks, but they voted against the money to pay for the mitigation measures. Whatever they argue, they voted against the £500 million-plus of benefits that we put forward to subsidise against British Tory cuts being imposed by London. When other parties in the House objected to and voted against the £500 million-plus package, not one of their Members offered, proposed or suggested an extra single pound to come out of any other part of the Budget to go towards further mitigations. We would have welcomed and supported that. At least acknowledge that the Executive paid for this out of the Budget.”
“I thank Mr McCann for giving way. He is in full flow, and it is important that he make the relevant points that he wants to make. <BR /> <BR />I go back to the origins of this. For the record, the Executive, for all the faults and failings that people, including us, have identified, made the political choice to make available from the block grant, because we could not get it out of the Tories in London, and spend over £500 million over a four-year period, after which there will be a full review of the efficacy of any of the supplementary payments. We made that £500 million-plus available over four years. We gave it over to an independent panel that was led by Professor Eileen Evason and included eminent members of the wider community, voluntary and professional sectors.”
“For the benefit of the House, would the Member like to recall that, when the Social Development Committee was considering many of these matters, I had to go to him as the leader on behalf of Michael Copeland? Michael Copeland was fighting the good fight in the Committee, but your party, under your leadership, did not support him. I had to go and ask you, on behalf of the Ulster Unionist Party, to give some support to Michael Copeland, who wanted to support people against the bedroom tax and other welfare cuts, but your party would not support him.”
“Thank you, Ms Mallon, for giving way. Could the Member not reflect on, and perhaps explain to, the 30,000-odd people who, you rightly say, would be very worried at the prospect of having to pay the bedroom tax, how on earth she can say that when, at the same time, had her party had its way last year, the bedroom tax would not be mitigated? Your party voted against a £500 million mitigation package. Your party, and your party, Mr Nesbitt, voted against that £500 million package. So, square that one.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. He is very eloquently talking about the need for a bedroom tax. Can he explain, then, why his party voted against the mitigation package, which included the bedroom tax subsidies?”
“I thank the Member for his supplementary question. There is a review under way, and the terms of reference have been agreed by the Committee on Procedures. The Assembly Commission does not want to prejudge or prejudice any of the outcomes or outworkings of the discussions being held by the Committee on Procedures. The Commission is looking forward to a report from the Committee on Procedures and from the Assembly, and then we will take that matter forward.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee on Procedures, as the Member may be aware, has recently agreed the terms of reference for the review, and these include: consider the current procedures and systems governing private Members' Bills in the Assembly; assess the available support and resources for the development of private Members' Bills in the Assembly; and research the procedures governing private Members' Bills and the support and resource available in other jurisdictions. From the response, you can see that the terms of reference do include the need identified by the Speaker for a complete review and overhaul of the need to support PMBs in the time ahead.”
“I thank the Member for the supplementary question. By way of background information, on 19 September 2016, following receipt by the Bill Office of 19 proposals for PMBs in the first few weeks of the new mandate, the Speaker wrote to the Committee on Procedures advising that he saw the increase in PMBs as a very positive sign and that it would be prudent for the Assembly's current procedures relating to PMBs to be reviewed. He also indicated that the Bill Office would be unable to support any more PMBs beyond the 19 proposals which had been tabled at the time.”
“The Assembly Commission has agreed to make an additional provision of £155,000 in its 2017-18 budget to respond to pressures on the Bill Office and Business Office, including the additional demand for support for PMBs. This amount has already been included in the Commission’s budget plans for the next financial year.”
“With your permission, I will answer question Nos 7 and 14 together, and I thank Members Bell and Logan for their questions. Since May 2016, 21 proposals for private Members' Bills (PMBs) have been tabled. The Bill Office is currently developing 19 of these under the private Member's Bill support service. <BR /> <BR />An additional senior assistant clerk was added to the Bill Office complement prior to the commencement of the new Assembly mandate in response to the increasing demand for support for private Members' Bills. However, due to the record number of proposals for PMBs received this mandate, a business case has now been put forward for additional staff resource for this important strand of parliamentary work.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. While she is lamenting the fact that, for example, the Narrow Water bridge has not yet been developed, does she not accept that many of her party colleagues supported all those parties in the last Southern mandate that withdrew the money the Irish Government had committed to the project?”
“— that have helped. I look forward to hearing from the Minister about other substantive support that will be given to these events in the future.”
“<BR /> <BR />I commend the Executive for all the work that has been done over the last number of years. I particularly commend all the people who have been involved in the sporting achievements, the tourism and other sporting bodies —”
“There is no doubt that the relatively small party that they will bring over here will increase the tourism spend not only in Belfast. A very good programme of events has already been arranged around that one small programme. It is only one. There was a previous similar initiative called Beltway, which married people from Washington and, mainly but not exclusively, Belfast — originally, it was an Ardoyne club. <BR /> <BR />These smaller sporting events are very important not only for the local economy but for the well-being of people here because more and more people are becoming involved in sport. Of course, when people come here to take part in those sporting events, they avail themselves of other parts of our tourism industry. That is all the better for everybody concerned.”
“<BR /> <BR />One of the things that has come through in the debate is that, although everybody acknowledges all the very many major sporting events, and rightly so — we are very thankful for them and for the prowess of our sportspeople and all those who support them, such as their coaches, trainers and families — all Members have testified to the fact that there are many much smaller sporting events that really go unsung. I will mention just one. On Friday past, I had the benefit of meeting those involved. It is a small event that involves two amateur boxing clubs: St Paul's in west Belfast and Scorpion in Ballymoney. The two clubs have come together and developed a partnership with Detroit. They hope to bring over a party from Detroit that will include Thomas Hearns, a very famous world champion of our generation.”
“Although the motion refers to the Executive achieving good things in the past, all those other organisations, be they tourism bodies or sporting bodies, not to mention all the participants, activists, sportsmen and sportswomen, have inspired many of us here and people around the world. The continuing success of the sports tourism industry and sector will add to the number of people who are involved in sport. That has an overall benefit to society here, because sport increases people's participation, addresses social exclusion and is far better for people's health, well-being and all the rest. It is a no-brainer, really: if we can, we should increase support for the sector.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Member for that intervention. There is no doubt of that. In the previous mandate, I was very clearly on record as saying that we need an overhaul of licensing legislation. I look forward to that happening in the time ahead. There is no doubt that it will also be of benefit if it is improved in the right and appropriate manner. <BR /> <BR />As I said, the community here is accruing very important economic benefits through sporting tourism events. Beyond that, they continue to increase the involvement of people here in sports.”
“<BR /> <BR />I look forward to hearing from the Minister, because, as Conor Murphy said already, we expect to hear that we will have substantial and substantive support for the tourism industry, not least the sporting tourism sector, in any upcoming tourism strategy and, in fact, right through to the heart of the economic strategy eventually. All Members have testified in the House this afternoon that it is a very important sector for a variety of reasons. It certainly helps the local economy. There is no question or doubt about that. It brings more people here and increases the spend locally in the broader community, including the hospitality sector.”
“Even though that party had Ministers in office in the previous mandates and was quite prepared to share in, and rightly so, some of the very good work that was done, it would never take responsibility for some of the work that was not done. Nevertheless, I recognise that Justin McNulty in his remarks did acknowledge that the Executive did do some good work. To that extent, I am quite pleased to hear that, because, ultimately, whatever way the amendment is voted on, I do not think that any of us can really find any substantive fault with the motion.”
“Like my colleagues, I support the motion. As I understand it, the Member who spoke previously said that the Ulster Unionist Party will also support the motion, albeit along with the amendment. I am not sure whether that means that, if the amendment falls, the party will support the motion. I hope that it will. As my colleagues, particularly Conor Murphy, have already said, in our support for the motion, we will not support the amendment, because it appears to us to be part of the now standard trend from the SDLP to be, in a way, mean-spirited, not wanting to recognise that the Executive have done anything right or of substance.”
“I thank the Minister for her response. Does she envisage that such a provision would be made on a statutory basis for those families that might seek to appeal those decisions?”
“I thank the First Minister for that fairly comprehensive answer. Notwithstanding the very complex nature of all this and the very significant challenges in the time ahead, is she confident that the report and its conclusions can be fully implemented in due course?”
“I urge the local business community and the local community and voluntary sector, for example, to look at the social enterprise sector, a sector that I look forward to working with in the coming mandate to develop business opportunities.”
“It is interesting that people in a lot of local businesses I have spoken to recently have not even heard of that legislation. Just for the record, it is legislation that allows a local business community to come together to plan for new initiatives to draw more people to local businesses. That includes everything from clean-ups to traffic management to shopfront uplifts and all the rest. Again, I appeal to the business community to examine the BIDS legislation as an opportunity. <BR /> <BR />I want to make my last comments on the social enterprise sector, which is a very important and growing sector that provides a public service, job opportunities and social benefits.”
“In that locality, you have the works planned for Casement Park, the new leisure centre to be built by the City Council next door and the public works associated with the rapid transit initiative. That adds up to over £100 million of public money being spent in that area, so it is important that the work is coordinated in a way that minimises the disruption to the local business community and the wider local community and allows the business community in particular to pick up the benefit of all of that work when it is completed. It is a massive amount of public investment, and it needs to have a wider and greater benefit in the long run. <BR /> <BR />There are also important opportunities for local businesses, and I refer to the business improvement districts (BIDS) legislation, which was passed in the last mandate.”
“Obviously, for the most part, when that disruption is finished, there is a much better product left for the local community to benefit from. However, while the works are going on, if they are not coordinated between the various bodies, people can suffer unnecessarily. We see that time and again. I use this afternoon's debate as an opportunity to ask the various government bodies to continue looking at their work schedules so that they can coordinate them with each other to minimise the disruption in communities. <BR /> <BR />In my constituency, on the greater Andersonstown Road, we have all seen in the last couple of days that the project for Casement Park has been relaunched. Hopefully, that will take a successful course in the time ahead.”
“<BR /> <BR />My colleague Caoimhe Archibald and others referred to some of the challenges and difficulties that our businesses suffer. We all know the challenges that many of our local businesses face, including rates, digital connectivity costs, staff costs, pension contributions and, more recently, training costs and all the other overheads in running a business in uncertain times. It is fair to say that there are supports that we can give other than money, as we all know from our constituencies. <BR /> <BR />I urge all the Departments and the statutory bodies to consider the local business community in particular when they carry out public works. Again and again, we see works being carried out that cause disruption.”
“<BR /> <BR />As Gordon Dunne referred to, small businesses are often the heartbeat of our communities. They usually offer not only a very important service but a smiling face. Some are even the local font of all knowledge as they seem to be able to pass a lot of information back and forth within the community and their customer base. They are a very important aspect of our communities and are at the heart of many. <BR /> <BR />Mervyn Storey, when moving the motion, outlined the various statistics, which we must all take on board when developing our strategies, and Sinéad mentioned that in relation to the economic development strategy. It is important that we recognise the importance of the statistics and that they tell us that local small and medium-sized businesses are the mainstay of our economy and, as such, need our support.”
“I support the motion. The tenor of the debate has been almost a love-in, especially compared with previous Assembly debates. I almost feel the need to throw in a discordant note to bring us back on track, but, thankfully, I will not have to. It is a very important message for the local business community, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises, that there will be no Division in the House today. That shows that all the parties and Members are very much at one not only in recognising local small and medium-sized businesses but in understanding the need to give them whatever support we can, especially in times of uncertainty. It is important that we speak with one voice in the House today, and the local business community will very much welcome that.”
“I thank the Minister for his responses so far. What are he and his Department doing to support the local small and medium-sized manufacturing sector?”
“I thank the Minister for her important statement. Where does she think there is any further potential to deliver specialised services on an all-island basis?”
“I thank the Minister for that response. Will she comment on media reports about the Attorney General's pledge that no one will face prosecution based on evidence given at the inquiry? Does this mean that former officers will not be prosecuted for anything that they may disclose during the inquiry?”
“I thank the Minister for that very welcome statement and confirmation of the Executive's position to support people on water charge impositions. How does that reflect on other jurisdictions? I am thinking particularly of how the Irish Government are dealing with water charges.”
“— which were not designed to inform the public but to put themselves in a better light.”