Jonathan Buckley
Upper Bann · Democratic Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“Sinn Féin's representatives in the European Parliament voted against proposals aimed at strengthening the management of illegal immigration and facilitating the return of failed asylum applicants — those who entered countries illegally — to designated return hubs outside the European Union.”
“Last year, Sinn Féin, alongside the open-border brigade of the Alliance Party and the SDLP, voted against my motion in the Assembly that called for action to address concerns about illegal and uncontrolled immigration.”
“People want an immigration system that is controlled, credible and properly enforced whilst ensuring that the genuine, heartfelt, lived experience and concerns of local citizens are at the heart of the debate. That is not an unreasonable position to take.”
“I highlight yet another example of a political party claiming to represent the views of people across the island of Ireland yet taking a position that is fundamentally out of step with the concerns being expressed by a vast number of people across Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland and, indeed, the rest of the United Kingdom, and t…”
“The Minister is aware and is, in fact, on record as having suggested that organised drug crime is happening in prisons. I have previously raised that matter in the Assembly.”
“Minister, I am sure that you agree that we cannot continue to leave residents in limbo. There has to be some progress on the matter. A number of unfinished developments have been lying stagnant for a long time, but the number is so small that it would not require that great an amount of money to ensure adequate facilities for residents, e…”
The complete record
Every one of 2,272 lines we hold for Jonathan Buckley, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 20 of 46.
“The Rwanda case is a case in point. I will not get into that today, because it is not part of articles 5 to 10, on which we will vote today. Be under no illusion: articles 5 to 10 contain vast swathes of EU laws that the Members opposite want to surrender to the European Union, but there are more, and they are fundamental. While we may not agree on the policy intent from Westminster in some regards, be it on the Rwanda policy or others, it is being interpreted in such a way that it will have a profound impact on the ability of the UK Government to bring forward legislation and policy in the best interests of the United Kingdom. <BR /> <BR />When the temporary derogation ends, Northern Ireland organic egg producers may be forced to use different feed compositions for hens in the same way as producers in GB.”
“The Member is absolutely right: divergence is happening all around, and it is impacting on consumers who, primarily, we must shield and protect by voting for laws that are in the best interests of the people of Northern Ireland. That must be at its core. <BR /> <BR />Companies and consumers are having problems sourcing tropical fish. There are specific requirements for retagging livestock sold to Northern Ireland keepers. Northern Ireland businesses face double the tariff costs faced by businesses established elsewhere in the UK because of differences in UK-EU trade defence measures. There are concerns over the supply of medical devices and products, including podiatry products. <BR /> <BR />Number 27: the potential for Northern Ireland to be carved out from the single UK immigration policy because of article 2.”
“How many times have our family members and constituents gone online to look for products that they normally buy at Christmas from GB suppliers only to be told that those are not for sale in Northern Ireland? That has been delivered to you by the Alliance Party, the SDLP and Sinn Féin.”
“I will in a moment. <BR /> <BR />Do I, as a proud Northern Irish man, look as though I am protecting the interests of GB businesses? The Member fails to understand my point entirely. Northern Ireland consumers are impacted on by the inability of GB suppliers to supply them in Northern Ireland. Who has not seen examples of that? It is Christmastime, Members. It is pantomime season for many of the Members opposite.”
“I thank the Member for his timely intervention.”
“Number 21: the EU retains a veto over state aid granted in Northern Ireland where it deems it to affect trade with the EU or exceed limits for farmers. The Government pause on UK-wide "Not for EU" labelling is creating uncertainty in relation to the appetite of GB firms to supply the Northern Ireland market. There is a chilling effect on GB businesses doing business with Northern Ireland.”
“I will finish my list first, and then I will come back.”
“Number 17: the movement of horses is now administratively complex and time-consuming, especially for local amateur competitors. The UK VAT margin scheme has not been available for second-hand goods that are purchased in GB and moved to Northern Ireland. The introduction of EU GPSR requirements on 13 December will create further chill factors on trade between GB and NI. The Irish Sea border that you see today, Members, will have changed by the end of the week. It is going to get worse, and not for the first occasion.”
“I will speak up and speak out for the people of Northern Ireland every chance I get, as will the Democratic Unionist Party.”
“I thank Mr Dickson for his intervention and remind him that every issue that I have raised — I am on number 16 and have a few to go — pertains to the people of Northern Ireland. It is about how they have been disenfranchised by arrangements that were propped up and supported by the Alliance Party, which called for rigorous implementation. Before I get back to point 16 — somebody remind me of that — let me remind you, Members, that the protocol that the Alliance Party asked for the rigorous implementation of was far worse than the variant that exists today. I will take no lectures about being a Little Englander; I am a proud Northern Irish man, and I will never shy away from speaking up for the people of Northern Ireland in this place. The Member may wish to send lawmaking off to Brussels at the behest of the EU, but I certainly do not.”
“<BR /> <BR />There is the cost and disruption of the requirement for supplementary declarations on GB to NI trade; treated wood for fencing for agricultural purposes not being permitted in Northern Ireland; the cost and delay associated with the Trader Support Service and the duty reimbursement scheme; new barriers to the shipment of waste between GB and NI; and significant rises in haulage, logistics and courier costs. Am I mad, Members? Am I the only person who sees those as genuine issues for consumers in Northern Ireland?”
“<BR /> <BR />There are new requirements for poultry fanciers travelling to GB; additional requirements on pets travelling to GB; an outright ban of certain plant and tree species; difficulties for florists seeking to secure flowers, ribbon and bamboo, resulting in diversion; continued barriers to livestock movement for shows and sales in GB; segregation and separation of Northern Ireland animals; divergence in type approvals for vehicles, jeopardising supply for Northern Ireland dealers, who traditionally source new cars from the GB stock; and extra controls on animal fodder and hay moving between GB and NI. Yes, I understand why hay is of such detriment to the EU single market. It has bedded many animals over many years, yet it was such a threat in 2010 to 2017 that it is still a threat today. I understand that.”
“<BR /> <BR />People have asked me many times to spell it out: "Tell us. Let us know what the issues are". For the purposes of today's debate, it is important that I do just that, so I will give some examples. At least 97 GB retailers have not been delivering to Northern Ireland as of September 2024. That excludes online marketplaces, which I may capture later in my contribution. There is a threat of the discontinuation of the supply of veterinary medicines to Northern Ireland from Great Britain; a ban on the direct-to-consumer sales to Northern Ireland of seeds marketed in GB; and the discontinuation of the supply of powered wheelchairs to Northern Ireland. I hope that Members understand the thread of what I am trying to get across. These are not unionist issues or nationalist issues; they are everybody's issues.”
“By that means, the rest of the UK would have to decide whether it wanted to keep its country together or subject itself to EU laws. Members may not universally agree with my constitutional outlook, but they should seriously consider the economic implications of articles 5 to 10 of the protocol that we are debating today and the impact that they have had on businesses and consumers. <BR /> <BR />I will talk first about the chilling effect on GB businesses and consumers. Each week, members of the Windsor Framework Democratic Scrutiny Committee gather to listen to proposed new EU laws or amendments and constantly ask officials what the impact will be on GB trade with Northern Ireland. Continually, although it is no fault of theirs, the officials cannot tell us. They have no ability to ascertain what the chilling impact will be.”
“It showed clearly that the objective was to ensure that Northern Ireland was captured in the EU's regulatory orbit, putting barriers between Northern Ireland citizens and their counterparts across England, Scotland and Wales. <BR /> <BR />The UK Government betrayed unionists in Northern Ireland. That was shameful. Successive Conservative Prime Ministers spoke much of constitutional guarantees and promised much in frictionless trade but delivered none of it. We all know what the EU's real political objective was. Michel Barnier used to say that the clock was ticking. Well, his clock ran out with the French people last week. His objective with the agreement was clear: Northern Ireland was to retain its place in the EU single market and customs area, thus keeping it in the EU regulatory orbit.”
“Leo Varadkar told us that, in order to have a lasting agreement and to protect and enshrine the institutions of the Belfast Agreement, there must be not even a camera at the border and that to have one would be such a dilution of the agreement and such an impingement on those who did not share my constitutional position. <BR /> <BR />The voices went silent, when, just recently, we received news that the guards were making border checks on buses and cars moving from Northern Ireland to the Republic of Ireland to ensure that immigrants were not passing into their territory. Not an eye was batted by Alliance, the SDLP or Sinn Féin. That was not the movement of bacon rashers, Members, but the movement of people.”
“We do not even have to look to Leo Varadkar in the Irish Parliament: we had Mary Lou and Michelle smashing fake border bricks, and we had Claire Hanna, the leader of the SDLP, talking about the concept of civil disobedience at a very minimum. That was the language not of unionists who had concerns but of those who were trying to force such undemocratic means on the people of Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />What was that in aid of? It was to protect against a hard border on the island of Ireland. That was one of the central tenets of the protocol.”
“That is quite a testimony from a young unionist. <BR /> <BR />We were told that the protocol was put in place to protect peace and stability in Northern Ireland. My constituent has outlined how it has had directly the opposite impact. Tensions are high. The protocol has fundamentally failed to ensure that there is no tension or violence on our streets. In times past, it has caused violence, threats of violence and the collapsing of political institutions. <BR /> <BR />At the time, we had Leo Varadkar, the then Taoiseach, going to the European Parliament and waving in his hand a photograph of a bombed customs post in an attempt to extol the virtues of subjugating unionists to arrangements that severed their unfettered access within the United Kingdom.”
“That will be a legitimate vote for another day. However, I guarantee Mr Carroll that, if such a decision is made, we will make it in the House as democratically elected Members in Northern Ireland. We will not sell it off to the Europeans to make the decision on our behalf. <BR /> <BR />I will finish the letter:”
“If some Members had their way, perhaps it would be every eight years.”
“I know that the Member wants to chunter, but I am expressing the sentiments of a young unionist in my constituency who feels that he is being disenfranchised by the vote. He goes on to say:”
“At the heart of this, however, is the future of democracy. That lies with our young people. I refer to a letter that I received from a young unionist just yesterday in which he expressed his deep grievance with today's vote:”
“It is the culmination of a long democratic dispersion, from the Northern Ireland protocol through to the Windsor framework and the present day. The people of Northern Ireland have been democratically disenfranchised and discriminated against in a way that the rest of the people of the United Kingdom simply have not. We have been humiliated and disrespected by having our rights to impact the laws to which we are subject demeaned. That has wider implications for the country. Today's vote asks each one of us to agree to uniquely discriminate against our constituents by denying them the right to have a say in all of the laws — not merely some of them — to which we are subject.”
“Yes, well, we will see. It would seem that times have changed, Mr Frew, in the Assembly. <BR /> <BR />The very nature of today's vote constitutes an assault on democracy.”
“In the context of the argument that Northern Ireland should therefore follow a different set of laws, should North Antrim follow a different set of laws? Should Upper Bann follow a different set of laws from Newry and Armagh? No, of course not, Members. It makes no sense. Doing so makes a mockery of what was a democratic vote by the nation of the United Kingdom, yet Members —.”
“I do not think that the Member picked me up correctly. The Upper Bann constituency voted as a majority to leave. That is exactly what I said.”
“Does the Member represent the views of those constituents? <BR /> <BR />The deputy leader of the Alliance Party? Upper Bann voted to leave. There are many Members in the House —.”
“I do not recall the ballot paper in 2016 reading, "Does Northern Ireland wish to remain part of the European Union?". It was a UK-wide referendum, and, should we want to boil it down into an ever narrower context, if we follow the narrative of the Member for North Antrim, North Antrim itself voted for Brexit.”
“The Member is absolutely right. I was not aware of Sinn Féin's political history with Europe. In fact, I was listening to some of the recent coverage of the Irish election, in which some of the commentators were trying to paint Sinn Féin as the Eurosceptics of the Irish Parliament. My goodness. I know that Sinn Féin is keen on Irish reunification, but its supporters in the South must not be taking much note of its actions in this place. <BR /> <BR />We listened to the Sinn Féin Member for North Antrim talk about the protocol protecting the Belfast Agreement in all its dimensions. As I said, cross-community voting has been ripped out. The Member said that Northern Ireland voted to remain and that we should therefore respect Northern Ireland's wish.”
“I will in a moment. <BR /> <BR />It is clear to me that nationalism has acceded to the EU planters by delivering regulation without representation. That is the objective of today's vote.”
“Again, the EU's little helpers in the Alliance Party are keen to grapple with those EU regulations.”
“The Member knows very well how unionism voted against it at every stage.”
“I know that Members take exception to the word "colonial", but I have seen at times, in history and in the current context, how Members, particularly those of a nationalist persuasion, have railed against laws made in the sovereign UK Parliament, 500 miles away, yet today they will happily acquiesce to sending our law-making ability 700 miles away, to a place to which nobody is elected. <BR /> <BR />If he wants to come in on that point to expound his rationale behind observer-status MEPs, by all means, Mr O'Toole, please take the Floor.”
“Multiple court rulings against the Government, who give hollow words of constitutional guarantees, show us how deceitful and shameful this entire episode has been. The point is not about whether Members agree with individual policy proposals. It is no legitimate way of dealing with these issues when we are surrendering the ability to make these very laws in Parliaments to which we elect Members. <BR /> <BR />We are disenfranchising our citizens in over 300 areas of law. Those 300 areas of law, Members, are not 300 laws but thousands of regulations controlling vast swathes of the Northern Ireland economy that are included in articles 5 to 10 of the protocol. It is colonial light control from the EU.”
“the Belfast Agreement. How ironic that Boris Johnson and subsequent UK Governments, as supposed custodians of that agreement, would be content to ride roughshod over the fundamental consent principle. How is the constitutional affront, whereby GB is decreed to be a third country, with the Irish Sea seen as the entry point to the EU customs area, in keeping with the spirit of the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement? How? <BR /> <BR />For Members who want to smirk, chunter and laugh from a sedentary position, I say that this goes to the very heart of how unionists feel about the Northern Ireland protocol. I have spoken very much from a constitutional perspective. I will come to the economic heartache that it has been causing to many of our businesses and consumers in recent times.”
“<BR /> <BR />Let us not forget that article 18(2) of the protocol — yes, I will quote from your protocol — actually decrees that any vote on the continuation of the arrangements should be held:”
“— and the Member cannot get away from the point that this will be the first occasion on which the Assembly, since 1998, will vote not on a cross-community basis, as was stipulated in the Belfast Agreement, on a major issue such as this. That is a step backward, and I say to the Alliance Party that it is quite clear that its agenda denigrated the concerns of unionism when it looked at cross-community voting as an issue that was of genuine need at the time of the agreement and that many nationalists used on many occasions to safeguard and protect the position that they held. However, when unionists look to cross-community consent to demonstrate their collective opposition to something quite substantial, the Alliance Party is silent.”
“The Member may think that we are in the Committee room of the Committee on Procedures, but I remind her that we are on the Floor of the Northern Ireland Assembly —”
“— I think that this goes to the heart of how the Alliance Party's continual abuse of democratic processes in this place —.”
“Do the Members want to chunter again about not demonstrating anything, yet the principle of cross-community consent”
“The principles of the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement should be respected in all its forms. <BR /> <BR />I have just demonstrated how those parties —”
“The DUP went on to say that day that the Government have:”
“I have seen that time and time again. <BR /> <BR />However, let us look at some of the commentary from an even more recent time: Lord Dodds, for example. On 19 October 2019, commenting in the House of Commons on Boris Johnson's deal with the European Union, he said:”
“It is clear that the Alliance Party is keen to cherry-pick when that suits its agenda. I have seen that clearly in my time in the Assembly. To put it in context, if Brussels was to self-identify as a plug, the Alliance spokesperson on the Windsor Framework Democratic Scrutiny Committee, Mr Tennyson, would self-identify as an EU adapter.”
“Do members of the Alliance Party, who were keen to intervene, and members of the SDLP, who were also keen to intervene, agree with the late Lord Trimble's comments on cross-community voting? I will give way.”
“Now, Mr Speaker, I will go back to the substance of what I was discussing, which was protecting the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement. I am pretty sure that no Member in the Chamber would deny the impact and, indeed, the participation of the late Lord Trimble in designing the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement. My party may not have shared some of the late Lord Trimble's positions — in fact, there were many that we did not share — but we do share the emphasis that he placed on cross-community voting. We do not have to look to legacy statements from 1998. We can look at what he said during the crafting of the protocol. I quote Lord Trimble:”
“I will not give way to the Member at this stage, but I promise that I will bring her in later. I know that she has plenty to say on these matters.”
“but her saying it in the Chamber today really is quite something. <BR /> <BR />The comments of the Members' parties at the time were clear. They accepted that at the heart of the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement was the need for cross-community voting on serious and substantial issues.”
“I always knew that Ms Armstrong harboured leadership ambitions”
“This is great viewing for anybody watching today — the Alliance Party calling for majoritarian rule.”