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 5 of 15.
“The Bill will introduce new powers for information sharing for the purpose of pursuing possession action in accordance with grounds 1, 2 and 3 of schedule 3 to the Housing (NI) Order 1983. The Committee agreed with the Housing Rights Service, which said in oral evidence that it believed that the definitions of "relevant information" and "relevant purpose" went beyond what was necessary. The Committee discussed that issue at length with the Department. Ultimately, the Department stated that, while the Minister did not believe that the references to grounds 1 and 3 went beyond what was necessary, if the Committee requested their removal, he would accept that in order to ensure the Bill's timely progress through the Assembly. The Committee very much appreciated that commitment from the Minister.”
“They are the sharing of information relating to empty properties; the disclosure of information relating to antisocial behaviour; and the registration as a statutory charge of certain loans. During the briefings and evidence sessions, stakeholders and members raised a number of issues about the Bill. <BR /> <BR />We have voted on clause 1, so I move swiftly on to clause 2, "Disclosure of information relating to anti-social behaviour". The Committee report deals with a number of issues on the clause, and I will deal with a couple of them now. The Committee considered stakeholders' concerns on the appropriateness of the information-sharing provisions that relate to antisocial behaviour and related definitions in the Bill.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for moving the Consideration Stage this afternoon and for his comments so far. The Committee for Social Development welcomed the Bill and noted that it encompasses three key areas, as the Minister outlined.”
“There is no logic for a lot of those quangos to remain in existence, and while we are talking about being over-governed with 108 MLAs and so on, we have 2,000-plus people appointed to public bodies, and many of those people have no accountability whatsoever. They are delivering a lot of money from the public purse, they are delivering a lot of services; many of them are very good, but there is also a number of people in quangoland, which, in my opinion, also needs to come to an end in due course.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Does the Member agree that whilst my colleagues and I support the reduction in the number of MLAs by 2021, we have heard a number of people say that we are over-governed and all the rest of that and perhaps we have some understanding of that? Does the Member also agree with me that when we talk about being over-governed, we also have to recognise that in the quango world out there there are more than 2,000 people currently appointed on public bodies? A number of those bodies are very important, because they are tribunals, or other types of bodies, but a lot of them were established under direct rule.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his answers so far. In furtherance of the idea of maximising opportunities and benefits from the devolution of corporation tax, will he give us an assurance that he will continue to negotiate and explore with the British Treasury how secondary benefits such as, for example, income tax coming from what is projected to be anything up to 35,000 jobs, could be, at least in part, kept here in the North?”
“When you add the Budget to the mitigation package, this is a good day, which we can all only hope to build on.”
“I welcome the fact that we have a Budget today that stabilises the political institutions, which now starts to give certainty to the Departments and, more importantly, the recipients of the Budget in the time ahead, at least for the next 12 months. It is important that we stabilise the situation with the Budget. The Budget was hard fought for but does not go anywhere far enough in addressing all the cuts imposed by London. I am satisfied, however, that, under the circumstances, the parties involved in the negotiations did as good a job as they possibly could.”
“I thank the Member for that intervention. I think the Member will know that a figure of over £500 million has been identified for mitigation for the cuts being imposed by the British Government and that there are other cuts. Obviously, that £500 million will not allay or assuage all the problems, but I firmly believe and am confident that it will go a considerable distance towards supporting those who are most vulnerable in our society. I look forward to hearing further details from Professor Evason and her colleagues when they are in a position to do that.”
“Communities need to see the benefit of the process that we are all involved in and are supposedly giving some leadership to. I encourage the Minister to make sure that, where cuts have to fall on Departments, we protect the most vulnerable. <BR /> <BR />In that context, I put on record my personal thanks and gratitude to the expert panel that today produced and published the welfare mitigation package. I have not read it in full but I understand that it does the job of determining where the allocation of £500 million —”
“<BR /> <BR />I think that what is important for me, and certainly for my party, is that we have hopefully managed to stabilise the political situation here with the embedding of these institutions. What we now have to do, and I have welcomed the comments from the First Minister and deputy First Minister and other colleagues in the last while, is to build on that. It is not enough that we have rescued this institution; we need to make it work in the best interests of all the people we represent. Certainly in my capacity as Chair and member of the Social Development Committee, a lot of my focus in recent times has been on the need for the provision of social housing and tackling disadvantage at its core within hard-pressed communities.”
“Yes, they can criticise and ask questions, but I really do question the integrity of a party that wants to sit in the Executive and then wants to question every other Minister about where their money is coming from or how they are spending it. Although I have said in previous debates that, if I had my way, there would not be an opposition provided for here because I think we are still coming out of conflict and all the parties have a responsibility to work together to tackle the big issues, if people are really so set on acting like an opposition, they should at least have the courage to join it, if there was one. They certainly have not provided any up to now.”
“Once the new Assembly and new Departments are established and the new Programme for Government is agreed to, the Departments and all the Ministers will have to work with their Committees and their members to do the best that they possibly can for the incoming year. More importantly, let us hope that, with the fresh start perspective, we can build for the future. <BR /> <BR />As a Member of Sinn Féin, I welcome the Budget and fully accept that there are difficult challenges within it. I have yet to hear from those who say they oppose the Budget. I put it on the record that some of those who say they will oppose this Budget have opposed every single Budget since 2007, so there is nothing new in that. More importantly, they continue to offer no alternative and nothing by way of saying, "Here's how we can do better".”
“The Minister will obviously be fully aware that the Committee is fully intent on working with the new Minister, Maurice Morrow, to try to see where we can minimise the impact of any cuts to service delivery, although we have no doubt that, as other Members said, there will be impacts on service delivery as these budgets are delivered. <BR /> <BR />That being said, it is important that we have a Budget. We accept that it is for one year. We appreciate that it will be ironed out in the June monitoring round and obviously thereafter. I suppose that is particularly helpful in the context of the elections coming up in May.”
“I appreciate that the process will be dealt with more holistically, if you like, in the June monitoring round. Nevertheless, I ask the Minister to give some clarity to that. <BR /> <BR />The Department briefed the Committee on 10 December and highlighted the fact that the cuts that it could have been facing were been anywhere from 5% to 10%. I think I can safely say that Members will be relieved that the 5·7% cut announced in the Budget is at least at the lesser end of the scale. Even in his new capacity as Finance Minister, the Minister will be aware that the Committee has routinely scrutinised the spend and is particularly focused on the provision for social housing, the protection of regeneration, and neighbourhood renewal funding streams and other streams within the voluntary and community sector.”
“It will allow for the Department to be subsumed into a larger Department and to work its way through the various new responsibilities. <BR /> <BR />I ask the Minister for some clarification on the £1 million de minimis rule whereby, in the new Department, heads of service units, for example, may have to apply to the Department or the Executive for spends of £1 million-plus. That could lead to a lot of bureaucracy, and decision-making being slowed down.”
“That is not to say that we are looking for any type of favouritism, but we would like to think that his experience will enable him to be continually more progressive in respect of housing, disadvantage and working with the social sectors of the community and the voluntary sector. <BR /> <BR />All that having been said, I think that we are at an important stage. It is important to remind ourselves that, just a matter of weeks ago, we were in very great danger of not having an Assembly or the other political institutions, never mind a Budget. It is welcome that we are here today with a Budget. <BR /> <BR />On behalf of the Social Development Committee, I would say that a one-year Budget is appropriate enough, particularly as the Department for Social Development merges into the new Department for Communities.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle — a LeasCheann Comhairle. Tá brón orm. I would like to say a few words as the Chair of the Social Development Committee. First, I welcome the Budget and congratulate the Minister, who, as Members are aware, was the Minister for Social Development until very recently. I am not sure that you would describe his new post as an elevation; you might even describe it as going from the frying pan into the fire. Nevertheless, members of the Social Development Committee who have grown accustomed to working with the Minister in his former capacity as Social Development Minister would hope, dream and like to think that he might perhaps bring some of his insights from the great and glorious work of his former Department to his decision-making in the new Department of Finance.”
“Does the Minister know whether any of the Administrations at the work stream meeting considered the key role of each Government for the provision of enough capital funding to support the social housing market, given the acute housing need across these islands?”
“It is also important to welcome the fact that innovative measures have been taken to address some of the issues, not least the Department's establishment of a task force for mortgage support.”
“First, it is important to acknowledge that there has been a very negative backdrop in recent years, because of, as the Minister mentioned, the global economy, the lack of capital funding for social housing provision in particular and a range of other negative factors, not least the quite significant number of people in negative equity.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I also wish the Minister well in taking up his new role. I look forward to working with him, at least for the rest of this mandate, as the Chair of the Social Development Committee. Housing is obviously a key element of the work facing all of us in the Assembly, and, as I say, I wish the Minister well in his endeavours. <BR /> <BR />I appreciate that he was not at the work stream meeting, so I appreciate that he may not be able to give a full response to some of the questions that he is asked.”
“I thank the Minister for that response. Obviously, there are difficulties surrounding developments like this. However, given the Minister's support for this initiative, could he at least make contact with or accept contact from Fold Housing Association to explore further opportunities for economic development on the site?”
“Go raibh maith agat arís, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Committee Stage began on Tuesday 8 December 2015 and is due to conclude on 8 February 2016. While the Committee has noted the potential benefits of the Bill for outdoor stadia and the wider economy, it expressed concern over the challenging timescales involved, and that remains the case. Of further importance to the Committee will be its consideration of possible amendments to deal with an issue around Drumbo racetrack and with alcohol-free discos to be held for teenagers in premises that are normally licensed. In general, the Committee wants to content itself that a sufficiently wide range of stakeholders has been consulted within a limited time frame. The Committee therefore agreed to seek an extension of Committee Stage to Friday 19 February 2016.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Committee Stage began on Tuesday 8 December 2015 and is due to conclude on 8 February. The Committee aims to complete its consideration of the Bill by the end of this month. However, we felt that it would be prudent to bring a motion to the Assembly to extend Committee Stage by four days to Friday 12 February 2016. That would allow an additional meeting of the Committee to deal with any unforeseen circumstances in dealing with what is a large and complex Bill.”
“There are also a number of largely technical provisions in the regulations, which the Minister has comprehensively drawn our attention to. <BR /> <BR />On that basis and in conclusion, a Cheann Comhairle, the Committee for Social Development formally recommends that the statutory rule be confirmed by the Assembly.”
“The Committee was supportive of the regulations. <BR /> <BR />The Committee noted that the regulations are a consequence of clause 42 of and schedule 18 to the Pensions Act to restrict charges or impose requirements on certain occupational pension schemes and set requirements relating to governance. The Committee further notes that the regulations cover a range of measures aimed at controlling the level and range of charges in relevant schemes that are used by employers to meet their automatic enrolment duties. Those include, for example, capping charges in the default arrangements within schemes. <BR /> <BR />The Committee notes that the regulations also impose a ban on active member discounts from April 2016 and apply new governance measures across broadly all occupational pension schemes that offer money purchase benefits.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Just following on from the Minister's sentiment, I am afraid to leave the Chamber because I do not know who else is going to resign or leave this great gathering. I pay tribute to those Members, because I understand that Mr McCarthy is leaving us, and Pat Ramsey announced his retirement as well. I wish them well and, indeed, anybody else who chooses to leave between now and May of their own volition. What the public may decide after that for the rest of us is something that time will tell. <BR /> <BR />I thank the Minister for bringing forward these regulations on occupational pension schemes. The Committee for Social Development considered the Department’s proposal to make the regulations at its meeting on 4 June 2015 and the resulting statutory rule at its meeting on 3 September.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Does he not agree that, had his colleague stayed in the Executive, he would have had all those answers and, not only that, he would have had his input into the decision-making on the answers that he now seeks? You gave up your opportunity to have an input and to come here and ask questions.”
“On that basis, I commend the Bill and support it on behalf of Sinn Féin.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I speak on behalf of Sinn Féin to support the Bill and to commend junior Minister Pengelly for explaining to the House the rationale behind it. She went through the clauses and what they represented comprehensively. It is fair to say that, for some time, there has been all-party support for reform of the structures. There has been agreement on a reduction in the number of Departments. We now have that proposal in front of us, and, as far as we are concerned, this is the time for us to get on with it. <BR /> <BR />It is about delivering what we promised we would deliver. I hope that, in the context of the recent discussions and negotiations, this will form part of evolving this place into a more efficient place with more effective working relationships.”
“If we can accommodate those other matters, the Committee will look to do that, but, at this point, the Committee is content with the principles of the Bill as introduced.”
“The Committee was fully in support of that, and, indeed, in our engagement with the Department and the previous Minister there was a clear understanding that the Department would not stand in the way if an amendment to enable the Drumbo track to proceed as it had requested were to be tabled. <BR /> <BR />Recently, there was also a fairly significant lobby in relation to young people's discos that would be held on licensed premises but at times when alcohol is not permitted to be sold. The Committee is well aware that there are other issues that came to light at our meetings. People have lobbied the Committee, and we have taken those discussions forward, but we are well aware that this is a narrowly defined Bill and we do not want to complicate things necessarily.”
“Therefore, while the Committee has noted the potential benefits of the Bill for outdoor stadia and the wider economy, it has expressed concern about the challenging timescales involved. The Member is aware of that, and that remains the case. As noted, of particular importance to the Committee will be its consideration of the amendments to remove some of the existing rules for access by children and, in general, the Committee will want to be content that a sufficiently wide range of stakeholders have been consulted within the limited time frame. <BR /> <BR />On a number of occasions, the Committee has been pressed and has supported the Drumbo racing track having an amendment to its licensing laws that, if I understand it correctly, would allow it to operate on a Sunday afternoon.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee acknowledges that, in enabling stadia to maximise their business potential, there will likely be benefits to the wider economy. In addition, the Committee acknowledges that stadia will operate under the same law as already exists for other licensed outlets and be required to offer the same protection regarding the use and potential abuse of alcohol as other premises. Again, the Member has already described that in some detail. The Bill is, therefore, tightly drawn and the definition of "stadium" contained in it is clear. <BR /> <BR />The Committee will take time to hear stakeholder views on the Bill. Members are, of course, aware of the enormous pressure on the legislative workload of the Assembly; indeed, the Committee for Social Development is currently considering two housing Bills.”
“While there is no threat or danger to anyone, the licensee would be and is in breach of the law if alcohol continues to be served when children are present. Attending sporting events is often a family event, as the Member has mentioned. It is my understanding, on behalf of the Committee, that rugby games often start late and run beyond 9.00 pm. It is not necessarily the case that allowing children to remain on the premises after 9.00pm when alcohol is being sold undermines that family focus or sets a bad example to children, when adults are behaving responsibly when consuming alcohol. That is perhaps the key issue that the Committee will focus on when it considers the evidence more fully.”
“The licence is linked with the caterer, not Ulster Rugby, and, of course, there is the potential for a licence not to be issued until very close to the time or the day of the match, with the implications that that has for planning the events. <BR /> <BR />The Committee was told that, in operational terms, there will be little difference to the selling of alcohol whether a stadium holds a full licence, which the Bill will facilitate, or an occasional licence has been issued. Where the difference comes into play — no pun intended — is how the Bill makes provision when children are on the premises. Many of us will have experience of the restrictions that apply after 9.00pm when attending a family event in licensed premises with young children present.”
“In practical terms, as the Member has outlined, that means the proposed Casement Park development, Windsor Park and the Kingspan Stadium. As was explained to the Committee by the Member, Windsor Park must operate in accordance with UEFA rules in respect of selling alcohol at matches and, clearly, with the delay in the development at Casement Park for the current period, in the short term the Bill is only likely to have direct impact on the Kingspan Stadium. However, we should recognise the potential benefit to other stadia in the future, and I am sure the Committee will explore that in due course during its consideration. As it stands, the Kingspan Stadium must apply for an occasional licence for an event, that is each rugby game that is to be held there. That has obvious drawbacks in the bureaucracy involved.”
“We all know that licensing laws and/or any amendments can stimulate a considerable amount of discussion, so I commend the Member for her work in bringing the Bill forward. <BR /> <BR />Mrs Cochrane briefed the Committee on the contents and purpose of the Bill on 15 October. The Committee understands that the Bill as introduced will permit outdoor stadia to apply for a licence on the same terms and conditions as an indoor arena, namely the SSE Arena. To that extent, the Bill builds on a previous amendment to the principal Order — the Licensing (Northern Ireland) Order 1996 — which was made in 2004. The Committee noted that, in the context of the Bill, "outdoor stadium" refers to a stadium designated as a regional or national stadium in regulations made by the Department.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Thank you very much, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker. <BR /> <BR />The Social Development Committee notes the introduction of the Licensing Bill and thanks the Member for bringing this to Second Stage in the Assembly this evening. I thank the Member particularly for her sterling work in having her own consultation and engagement with the Department and a wide range of stakeholders. She has certainly displayed a considerable amount of due diligence in this regard and has sought to engage Members at every stage while she was developing the Bill. She has sought to make sure that the Bill is narrow enough to create fewer complications.”
“Go raibh maith agat. Again, I thank the Minister. Certainly, in my experience over the last number of years, Belfast City Council has been a lead agency in the response, both to homeowners and to small businesses. I know that the Minister has alluded to various agencies and Departments working together. Would it be useful if all other council areas, which may be starting to experience some of these difficulties as well, were able to avail themselves of the expertise that has been accrued in Belfast City Council?”
“I thank the Minister for his comprehensive responses so far. He has confirmed the role of DARD and the Minister, Michelle O'Neill. Will he outline the work required in the time ahead, including forward work planning with the various Departments, including DARD, to enhance the work already undertaken?”
“I thank Mr Nesbitt for further giving way. I know that you sought clarification from the Members who propose the amendment, and that is fine. I think that they have explained what they meant, but that certainly would not have been the reading of the amendment as the Committee had to consider it. As Chair of the Committee, will the Member confirm that the entire — in fact, unanimous — view of the Committee of the policy intent here, from day one, was to make sure that we had a process and a system that would maximise protection for citizens but not in a way that is just completely litigation-driven? We worked on the premise that one lawyer begets another, and that brings it into an entirely different scenario that the Committee had unanimously always sought to avoid. Where we can, we must avoid moving towards that process.”
“If the code of conduct worked as effectively as you suggest, you might have had a different outcome. It is best to deal with those deficits of accountability elsewhere, not in the Bill. <BR /> <BR />There are a number of other technical amendments. The complaints-handling procedure is legislation that we have, if you like, embraced from elsewhere. On that basis, we are prepared to support the rest of the amendments.”
“You may want to continue rehearsing the inquiry. That is one example that you have experienced, and that is all very well. Some of us would share that view. I simply make the point that the deficit that you identify is not best dealt with in the Bill, which is specific legislation dealing with a particular function. SpAds are not supposed to discharge any function of a Department. Therefore, you have to find another way to make sure that that is being rigidly upheld. That would not be best dealt with here. The experience that we have had so far underpins that view. On that basis, we do not support amendment No 31. <BR /> <BR />I do not for one second dismiss some of your concerns; I am simply saying that they are best dealt with elsewhere. I share your view that those deficits need to be dealt with and have not yet been dealt with.”
“I just make the point that I am not supporting the amendment, because it will not have any impact. Probably more importantly, the legislation refers specifically to people who will discharge or exercise functions of the Department: SpAds, by their very nature, cannot, should not and must not discharge the functions of a Department. I accept entirely that issues were brought to light, particularly DSD-related issues. By the same token, those deficits — I accept that there are deficits — are better dealt with elsewhere, not least in the code of conduct. <BR /> <BR />The other amendment relates to the complaints-handling procedure —”
“I do not want to go into any of that, and I do not want to rehearse the Committee's inquiry. It was a lengthy inquiry. I simply make the point that, if amendment No 31 had been in effect at the time, it would not have had any impact at all on the working of that Committee inquiry. The Member will know that there was a lengthy inquiry. People were brought in and gave their evidence. People were brought in on more than one occasion to give evidence. There was conflicting evidence. People gave evidence under oath or affirmation. That is the way it happened. The Committee had all and ample power to investigate what happened there and reach its ultimate conclusions.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I will make a couple of brief points, if I might. I will be against amendment No 31. When Mr Beggs cites the example from the Social Development Committee, he actually, in a way, defeats his own argument. Looking at the totality of that and how it worked out, if you had amended the NIPSO Bill in this way, it still would not have had any effect because of the nature of the evidence given. You will recall that people gave evidence under affirmation and so on, so an amendment such as this would not have taken effect.”
“I thank the Minister for that. Will he continue to give leadership in working with all the other relevant educational authorities and agencies to try to make sure that we roll out such successful programmes in the future, as he has been doing for some time?”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I have just a few words on this group of amendments. The Chairperson has dealt with amendment Nos 21, 171 and 173. For the record, as a party grouping, we were satisfied that taking out the word "clinical" was dealt with in previous discussions, but it has been replaced by "professional", so it is a consequential change necessitated by previous discussions. We are satisfied that the ability of the ombudsperson to do his or her job in the context of any professional issues that are raised is dealt with adequately in the Bill. As has been pointed out, our view is that amendment No 139 is completely superfluous to requirements, as it is dealt with elsewhere.”