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 7 of 15.
“I am sorry, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, but I am not speaking at this point. I will just move amendment No. 3 later.”
“I appreciate that contribution from the Member. It just underscores the importance of bringing such a motion forward today. We are more than happy to accept the amendment. I take encouragement from all the contributions today; the Members who spoke recognise the burdens that the tax credit cuts will impose on families who are working hard to put a loaf on the table.”
“Your party, in this afternoon's contributions, talked about the problems around the tax credit cuts and welfare. Let us hear any ideas that you have. You cannot simply rely on criticising Sinn Féin for not having a plan. If you disagree with the welfare and tax credit cuts, you have a responsibility to bring your proposals to the table. In our bilateral discussions with your party, we have raised that with you. We have asked you to produce your own goods, but we have not heard anything yet. However, the talks, hopefully, will commence in a much more intensive way in the next week or two, and you will have the opportunity to put your proposals on the table.”
“All I would say in that regard is that significant progress was made during the Stormont House talks. Whatever about how the wheels fell off the wagon after that, we are very satisfied that very clear and specific proposals were on the table that were agreed by the parties. Today, as the Member will be aware because he was at the meeting, we made it very clear that the landscape has changed since the last election. We will certainly get round the table to try to hammer out the best that we can all do to defend the most vulnerable in our society. <BR /> <BR />The Member took a few minutes of his time earlier to criticise my party for not having, as he said, specific plans or proposals. We had proposals and specifics, and we dealt with them in the Stormont House talks. I invite the Member to bring forward your party's views.”
“As I said earlier, my party made it very clear today that a big focus for us in the upcoming talks around the financial side of things in terms of the negotiations will be around tackling the welfare cuts. It will be about trying to do what we can around the whole issue of tax credit cuts. I invite all the other parties to join us in doing that.”
“Do not forget that our block grant is going to be reduced by about £1·5 billion over the next four or five years. This is something that we cannot escape from. I think that Basil McCrea said that people out there will be looking to us to see what we can do to mitigate the worst excesses of Tory rule from London. That is what we have a responsibility to do.”
“We all still have a responsibility to tackle that problem, which was made worse by the Tory Government in their last number of announcements on their Budget and their projections for the time ahead. <BR /> <BR />We have a direct responsibility and opportunity in the upcoming talks to tackle, to the best of our ability, the issue of the cuts to welfare, which the British Government are trying to impose on the most vulnerable in our society, and the cuts to the tax credit system. Let us vow to do what we can. We may disagree on what we can do or the extent to which we can do it, but one thing that we can do is unite in our opposition to those tax credit cuts and our opposition to the British Government's continuing assault on the welfare system and attacks on the public services.”
“However, today and in the short time ahead, all of the parties in the Assembly have our own opportunity to do something about the tax credit cuts that are being imposed on people out there, whatever about how we agree or disagree in our attitudes to welfare. <BR /> <BR />I heard Stewart Dickson earlier talking about the welfare reform misery. Again that is another acknowledgement that what is coming down the line to people in relation to welfare cuts is not a happy prospect. What we all have to do is work and do our best to mitigate that. There has been a row over the issue for the last number of years. It was a very central part of the Stormont House Agreement talks. That still needs to be on the table in the current round of talks, and it will be.”
“We actually bother a lot to get a mandate, which mandates us not to go to Westminster. That does not mean to say, by any stretch of anybody's imagination, that we do not work, lobby and fight very hard for those who will be adversely affected by British Government legislation. I do not think we have been found wanting on that in any respect. Our voice has been, and will continue to be, heard, and the people who we represent will be effectively represented. I wish well to anyone who goes to Westminster and wants to challenge the British Government. They are entitled to do that. That is their mandate, and good luck with it.”
“Right away, you can see that attempt by the British Government to say, "We're taking this off you, but, here, we're looking after you. We're giving you this other money on the other hand". It still works out less. <BR /> <BR />The conservative figures — I do not mean the Conservative Party — tell you that families could lose anything from £550 to £900-plus a year after that. Again, no matter what way you look at it, people who are on low pay or low income or who are working a limited number of hours will all suffer as a consequence of those latest announcements by the British Government. <BR /> <BR />All our party says is that, yes, people who go to Westminster can go to Westminster. We do not "not bother" — somebody said earlier on that we "do not bother" to go.”
“While we may always disagree on some nuance or minor detail, nothing has been said in the Chamber today by any Member from any party that has taken away from the intention behind the motion, which is to highlight what can only be described as an attack on the underemployed and the underpaid — people who, for the most part, are trying to rear a family, go to work and make ends meet. <BR /> <BR />There are a number of figures presented. The Institute for Fiscal Studies actually says that, even if you take it in the round, with the introduction of what it calls the living wage, about a third of that will actually go back directly to the British Government in lieu of additional tax revenue raising. There are also more limited obligations on welfare benefits and tax credits.”
“In terms of dealing with welfare issues and budgetary and financial matters, we specifically highlighted the changed environment since the last general election, with the election of a Tory Government, who are now introducing a whole range of other cuts, including the attacks on the tax credit system, which, everybody around the Chamber today has acknowledged, will have a negative impact on the people who we all represent in the various constituencies. <BR /> <BR />I thank the Members for their contributions.”
“We are very pleased to accept that amendment, and we share the concerns of the Members from the Ulster Unionist Party about the impact that the tax credit changes will bring to bear on many people who will be even more vulnerable following their introduction. <BR /> <BR />I will actually go further and say to Mr Beggs that most of what he said actually vindicates the Sinn Féin position on trying to challenge and face down some of the welfare cuts that have been proposed by London. Indeed, if the Member will acknowledge it, as late as today at the talks, our party made it very clear.”
“Nevertheless, it is recognised and respected by our party as a genuine attempt on behalf of the Ulster Unionist Party to add to the motion.”
“In fact, it is interesting that Roy Beggs spent a fair wee bit of his contribution criticising my party, and Leslie Cree followed that up and also decried the fact that the motion noted, acknowledged and so on and so forth, but did not make any specific recommendation that we do a, b or c. That was quite deliberate on our behalf, because we simply wanted to air the issue and get maximum consensus around the Chamber. <BR /> <BR />In fairness, and I say this respectively to Ulster Unionist Party colleagues, their amendment does not exactly represent the clarion call to mobilise the masses. It basically asks the British Government to try to be kinder to people who may fall foul of their tax credit changes and other tax measures.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. First, I thank all the Members who participated in the debate this afternoon. As Basil McCrea pointed out, he, and I think all the parties, recognise that this is a very important issue and one that requires fairly significant debate. I thank the Research and Information Service for providing the paperwork and the research pack for Members' benefit. It is worth reading and considering in the time ahead. Obviously, this afternoon just gives the parties an opportunity to express their views on the issue and highlight the major problem that we all have to face. <BR /> <BR />We have no hesitation in accepting the amendment tabled by the Ulster Unionist Party.”
“I thank the Minister for that response. Will she comment on the fact that the PAR report states that a new planning application for Casement will take up to 12 months to prepare? Is she content with that time frame?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. While I do not necessarily disagree with some of his remarks, I ask him this: given his obvious — or apparent — passion on the issue, did he not consider at any point when the inquiry was held by the Committee, when a lot of stakeholders made suggestions and recommendations and tried to be constructive, that he could also have made some positive, constructive suggestions, rather than just getting up in the Assembly and slabbering, which he is doing this afternoon?”
“— and doing single-identity work to make sure that they work with the politicians, not against the politicians because neither can the politicians do all the work themselves. These matters are societal, and people across society have to work together. I commend the report on that basis.”
“Too many people live in homogeneous communities, but that is the nature of our society. There are a number of what might be described as shared neighbourhoods, but despite the great work that has been going on for years, an awful lot more work needs to be done. <BR /> <BR />When we have disputes around flags, parades and so on, very often communities that have been working at the coalface to build good relations tend to take a step back when they see big controversial issues coming. In other words, when they see the parties taking a lead on those matters, I have found that, over the years, many of the people who have been working at the coalface tend to take a step back. I think that is unfortunate and regrettable. I urge all those out there who have great experience working at cross-community activity, building good relations —”
“I listened to the argument around single-identity work, and I think that it is an important part of it, but, in a way, some communities and organisations have chosen to stay within a single-identity framework. I do not think that is at all healthy. It is important that we give each community and all sectors in our community, be it young people, women or whoever, the tools. That is what the inquiry report recommends. <BR /> <BR />We need to give people the tools to build their capacity to work from within, if that is what makes them comfortable and if they want to learn about and share their own identity and where they see challenges to that. But it is essential that we signpost those people into making sure that they work with the rest of the communities that are around them because none of us live in an island.”
“I would like to pay tribute to many of those people because they have been working very often quietly and in the background to try to sustain their own communities as they see them and are part of, but also work with others. <BR /> <BR />I want to put on record that, going back to the early 1990s when we had European Peace money coming here, we devised strategies that were very important and there were great lessons around that because there were partnership arrangements in play, and it was probably the first time that we had actual organic partnerships organised and working. That gave a lot of people an opportunity. There was significant funding made available from 1994 for at least another couple of years. A lot of people were doing single-identity work.”
“Go raibh maith agat, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker. I thank the Member for that. Our party is in total agreement that we need to make sure that we protect all our communities. If that means we have to develop different and additional strategies, that has to be the case. I support the concept that we make sure that we develop all these strategies in the interests of all people who now live in this society and many whom we around this Chamber represent. <BR /> <BR />In conducting the inquiry, there were no surprises because we spoke to a lot of people who have been working at these issues for some time. As the Chair said, some organisations have had a collective 100-year span of experience. I know people around the community who have been working at what we often call the coalface.”
“Yes, we have to stand by and protect all our rights and identities, but we have to do so in the context that there are many other worthy and worthwhile communities and identities here, all of which need to be respected on the same equal basis.”
“That does not mean for one second that we seek to diminish or downplay our national identity; it simply gives us a greater opportunity to learn from others. We have to share whatever our identity is with others and learn from them. <BR /> <BR />Having been an elected representative for quite a number of years, I, for one, have had many, many opportunities to work with people from different community and ethnic minority backgrounds, people of different nationalities and people who have come here more recently. Tremendous opportunities have been afforded to people like me and many other local elected representatives to work with others, learn directly from their experiences and share the best aspects of their cultures.”
“I would like to say just a few words this afternoon on the inquiry report. I join colleagues in thanking all staff members who worked tirelessly to facilitate this. I also thank all those who participated in the inquiry, including all the Committee members, and particularly the stakeholder organisations and representatives who came and gave of their valuable time and even more valuable experience to allow the Committee to consider T:BUC in the context of work already under way in quite a number of communities. <BR /> <BR />We often talk about the two communities, and, yes, we do have two core aspects of our community, which is divided along key national identity and constitutional lines. However, thankfully, in another way, we are becoming an increasingly multicultural society, which will be to the benefit of all of us.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for that response. Does the Minister not agree that there was no legislative requirement to block this planning application, on the basis that it was a question of demand as opposed to need? Would he not be prepared to work with the Boals, given that the demand speaks for itself? Would it not be worthwhile for the Minister to have some discussion with the Boals to see whether the facility can work?”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for her answers. Will she outline whether there are any potential difficulties in any of the zonal budgets or the progression of any projects should DSD, for example, fail to follow through on its previous funding commitments to SIF projects?”
“<BR /> <BR />As far as our party is concerned, it is essential for these institutions not only to remain in place but, more importantly, to work in the interests of all the people the parties in the Chamber represent. In the context of the continuing instability and uncertainty, there is an imperative to intensify the work of these institutions, including the Assembly and the North/South institutional bodies.”
“It is certainly not the agenda of those of us who are trying to demonstrate to the wider public that politics actually works. It is certainly not in the interests of people who want first-class public services at their disposal. We have heard a litany of examples of people being frightened or anxious and angry about the prospects of non-delivery of public services when Ministers are no longer at the wheel and in charge of their Departments. People want parties here who are working on their behalf and championing against the kinds of cuts that are being imposed from London. We are seeing in British politics the potential of a hopeful period when there are people now in civic society who are trying to challenge the status quo around the austerity agenda of cuts and attacks on public services and on people who are vulnerable and on benefits.”
“In that respect, I am calling on both unionist parties to end their sham fight and have the political will to go into the talks today with the serious intent of getting successful outcomes in respect of all the outstanding matters, not least the current crisis but, indeed, the matters that have been inflicted on this Assembly for a long time, particularly in respect of cuts imposed by London. <BR /> <BR />I am asking both unionist parties to demonstrate the political will to end their sham fight. Keep your sham fight for Scarva. There is no question that both parties need to ask themselves the real question: whose interests or agenda will be best served by the collapse of these institutions or with the continuing political uncertainty that there is today?”
“As far as Sinn Féin is concerned, there can be only two outcomes: either we have a successful conclusion to the talks or we go straight into elections and let the people have their say on all the various parties.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Ms Sugden brought this matter to the House today, and you, Mr Speaker, have advised Members to be mindful of the remarks that they might want to make and to keep those remarks and the intentions behind them for the talks themselves. Clearly, the talks are due to begin today, so we will see how today pans out and what we are facing at the end of the day when the parties have had their various bilaterals and trilaterals and so on. <BR /> <BR />From our party's point of view, in the talks beginning today, there needs to be the political will, between all parties and all participants, for a successful outcome.”
“Even the Housing Executive senior management is still going through change management, and that means that uncertainty can be created. <BR /> <BR />This is not a do-nothing option but is saying, "Let us look urgently with the Minister and the Department at the social housing reform programme and accelerate that work, particularly in the Social Development Committee". It is a matter for that Committee and the Minister to agree on, but I believe that an acceleration and intensification of the discussions on the social housing reform programme will make the Assembly a greater success, especially if we can agree on the new structures required for the provision of social housing before the end of the current mandate.”
“Sorry, I cannot give way, Mr Beggs, because I am running out of time. <BR /> <BR />We are simply saying that there has been a lot of uncertainty, particularly from within the Housing Executive. We are saying that there are people in there who believe that there are measures being taken in the Housing Executive. There may not be that many more measures being delivered at the moment. So, the motion may be slightly out of date, but it is very well intended. It is simply saying that, if things are done in there that undermine the Housing Executive's ability to deliver, they need to stop. We are asking the Minister to do that. That may simply require a conversation between the Minister, senior officials and the Housing Executive.”
“As people here will know, the social housing reform programme officers have presented to the Social Development Committee on a number of occasions. As far as I am concerned, this Minister is up for a proper early discussion on what structures we now need to modernise the Housing Executive. Our party's point of view is that it has to be what I have often referred to as the Housing Executive mark 2 with whatever sufficient reforms are required, because we need to get money into the system so that we can build more houses to meet the needs of people; we need to find the finance to update, repair and modernise houses that need it; we need to look at the allocation systems; we need to look at how need is met right across the board. So, we are saying that this is not about —”
“No, this has nothing to do with doing nothing. This is simply to say that people have a fear that there are things happening in the Housing Executive that should not happen until we have agreement. We all agree that what has been best for housing has been the formation of the Housing Executive and the work that it has been involved in for many years, albeit there is no doubt that there were failings. What we are up for is to properly consider the options that are on the table.”
“There was instability in the Housing Executive and the broader housing field because a lot of people in the housing associations, for example, were saying, "Are we going to have to pick up the pieces? Will we be getting some of those houses transferred to us? Where are we all on this?". I am certainly much more confident following the appointment of Mervyn Storey as the Minister for Social Development that we can have a constructive debate and good dialogue. I believe that the Minister is well up for that, and he has expressed that to me. I know that he has gone to great lengths to talk to people in the housing sector to explain that he wants housing need met on behalf of all the people we collectively represent and in a way that avails itself of structures that are modernised and improved.”
“I hope that that programme and those reports can, as part of that prioritisation by the Committee for Social Development, be accelerated to make sure that we can, hopefully, get political agreement, before the end of the mandate, on the future delivery of social housing. <BR /> <BR />A feature of the housing sector for the past two or three years has been a terrible uncertainty and instability among providers. Clearly, when the Housing Executive was losing senior managers at the rate of nearly one a week for a time, and there was a lack of leadership and a loss of leadership and key managers for a variety of reasons, a lot of staff in the organisation, who were working hard every day to deliver social housing and working with tenants to deliver on their needs, were worried about their future.”
“<BR /> <BR />I speak as a political representative today and not on behalf of the Committee for Social Development, but I am very pleased that, as those of us who are members of that Committee are aware, we have adopted housing as a priority piece of work for the Committee for the next weeks and months, however long that takes. We will do that in conjunction with the Department and Minister on a constructive basis. The social housing reform programme has been reporting to the Committee on everything from rental policy to allocations, procurements, funding for social housing and so on.”
“Those people have been expressing concern that, while we have not ultimately agreed on what we are going to do on social housing provision, there are things happening now to the Housing Executive that are significantly damaging that organisation's ability to do that which we have all commended it for doing and that which it has done well for a number of years. I apologise if people think that the motion is unclear or uncertain, but it is clearly designed to say, "Let's get political agreement on the social housing structures to be delivered". That has to reflect the best of what was the Housing Executive, which everybody has praised this afternoon. Any efforts that may be ongoing to take away some existing functions from the Housing Executive really should not proceed until we get the political agreement.”
“Amid all the other turmoil of the past couple of years, concerns were expressed to us and others by people in the Housing Executive — senior people at that — that what was not being delivered by way of political agreement and consensus was being delivered by stealth. In other words, important policies and delivery mechanisms were being taken away from the Housing Executive. That is where the motion stems from. It is about addressing the fear that many in the Housing Executive and the wider housing body have expressed.”
“I am talking about people who were, in some way or other, involved in the development of policy around the Housing Executive. Clearly, there were proposals on the table that would have got rid of the Housing Executive and dismantled it into a landlord body, with all the social housing transferred to a number of housing associations. We would then have had a regional housing authority that would have dealt with other issues including homelessness, supporting housing and a raft of other important policies, a number of which Members have addressed this afternoon. <BR /> <BR />People in the Housing Executive were witnessing those things and expressing concerns about them. Those concerns have been raised in the Committee for Social Development but also directly in public and in private with Members. People see that there was an effort made.”
“That vindicates us in tabling the motion, albeit, as I said, that we could have, perhaps, reflected on the use of the words. <BR /> <BR />It is important to say also that I would benchmark this against the appointment of the current Minister, Mervyn Storey. I have no doubt — I have personal experience of it — that this Minister has made very important efforts to stabilise uncertainties not only in the Housing Executive but in the broader housing sector. Our motion reflects a long period when people inside the Housing Executive and people outside it involved in housing provision have had a concern that there was, initially, an agenda essentially to get rid of the Housing Executive. I have heard that expressed to me by people who should have known better.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. First, I thank Fra McCann for tabling the motion and all the Members who participated in the debate. I want to clear up a couple of points. Obviously, on reflection, one could have rephrased the motion but, having listened to the Members' contributions, I note that everyone, to one degree or another, usually quite positively and strongly, has given support to the Housing Executive and commended it for the great work that it has done over many years, albeit that every one of us, me included, would add caveats around the Housing Executive's failures over the years. However, it is heart-warming to hear all the Members who spoke express confidence in the Housing Executive to some degree or another.”
“I thank the Minister for that reply. Does he agree that the recent comments from the coroner, John Leckey, point out that the current system is having a very negative impact on public confidence and that remedial action is required to restore that confidence?”
“Go raibh maith agat. I thank the deputy First Minister for that response. Can he give us a sense of the other functions that are being transferred to other Departments under the departmental restructuring?”
“In the earlier part of the debate, a number of Members expressed their condolences to Mr Bain on his very recent bereavement. On behalf of our party group, I want to disassociate us from some of the remarks that were made by people tonight. They were grossly and utterly insensitive and offensive. Given the bereavement, it is important that we disassociate ourselves from those remarks.”
“No, it follows on from the previous point of order and your remarks.”
“As I have said, the Minister's response regarding the steps taken to protect the consumer will go some way to provide assurances on these matters.”