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 28 of 46.
“<BR /> <BR />The Motor Insurers' Bureau, which represents the interests of the motor insurance industry, provided a detailed response, outlining why it believes that the legislation is necessary and why it considers the matter to be urgent. In acknowledging that the appropriate legislative process is a matter for the Assembly, the Motor Insurers' Bureau stated in its response that effecting legislative change as expeditiously as is procedurally possible, would:”
“<BR /> <BR />I will outline the evidence received by the Committee on the need for the legislation. The Minister explained that domestic legislation restricts compulsory insurance to the use of motor vehicles on roads and in other public places, whereas case law suggests a much wider interpretation. Ultimately, that would mean that the Motor Insurers' Bureau here would be vulnerable to claims brought by victims of incidents on private land and, potentially, to fraudulent claims. <BR /> <BR />The Consumer Council, which represents the interests of Northern Ireland consumers, responded in support of the legislation and the approach being taken.”
“The Minister then told the Committee that the LCM route was not considered viable, as Ministers in DfT had taken a cautious approach because they did not want to increase any risk of the Bill not being brought forward. That then left the Department for Infrastructure with no option but to seek accelerated passage for a Bill in the Assembly. The Minister outlined to the Committee her disappointment with the approach adopted by DfT. <BR /> <BR />The Committee asked the Minister whether the Bill would include any delegated powers leading to subordinate legislation, and, if so, to which aspects of the Bill they would relate and to which type of Assembly procedure they would be subject. Departmental officials assured the Committee that there would be no subordinate legislation arising from the Bill.”
“Members explored why, if this is such a significant matter, greater priority was not given to ensuring that Northern Ireland was included in the Bill currently proceeding through the Westminster Parliament, especially as there could be additional cost to the UK Government by way of compensation claims to the Motor Insurers' Bureau. <BR /> <BR />The Minister assured the Committee that every effort had been made to work with Department for Transport officials and that it had been her understanding that the Northern Ireland provisions could be included in the private Member's Bill currently proceeding through Westminster by way of a legislative consent motion.”
“In order to preserve the status quo in domestic motor insurance legislation, it is therefore considered necessary to remove the provision from retained EU case law. <BR /> <BR />During oral evidence, it was outlined how the EU had amended the relevant directive, which was adopted in December 2021. Member states have two years in which to implement the directive. The Department understands that a number of member states want to amend their legislation more quickly, as they have an anomaly similar to that which we have here in Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />A key area that the Committee explored was why accelerated passage was being sought for the Bill. The Committee wanted to know the likelihood of a case being brought, and its likely impact.”
“That does not usually happen for Bills of this nature, so again I put on record the Committee's thanks to RaISe for its efforts in putting the pack together. <BR /> <BR />In correspondence with the Committee on the Bill, the Minister outlined the need for the legislation and the implications of the Vnuk judgement, which meant that, unless existing statutory provision was amended, GB and Northern Ireland would potentially be vulnerable to compensation claims. Her correspondence highlighted the fact that a High Court decision in England and Wales in 2018 established that the Motor Insurers' Bureau would be directly liable for claims relating to uninsured motor collisions occurring on private land.”
“As I informed the House during the debate on the motion seeking accelerated passage for the Bill, the Committee for Infrastructure first considered the proposal for a Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance) Bill at its meeting on 19 January 2022. <BR /> <BR />In the absence of a Committee Stage, I will take some time to put on record details of the scrutiny that the Committee for Infrastructure undertook on the proposals outlined in the Bill. The Committee was able to take sufficient evidence during pre-legislative scrutiny. The Assembly's Research and Information Service (RaISe) was able to collate a fairly comprehensive information pack outlining that evidence, and that is available to Members.”
“On that basis, the Committee for Infrastructure is content to support the Minister and the Executive in seeking accelerated passage for the Bill.”
“<BR /> <BR />During the Committee's deliberations, all members remained mindful of the need, under normal circumstances, for Committees to be given the opportunity to undertake detailed scrutiny of all primary legislation. However, the Committee recognised that the circumstances under which the policy proposals in the Bill are being considered are exceptional and are not of the Minister's making, given that considerable efforts were made by the Department to progress it in another place. <BR /> <BR />The Committee is satisfied that the evidence that it has considered is sufficient under those circumstances, and the urgency associated with passing the Bill outweighed the need for further detailed scrutiny by the Committee.”
“The Ulster Farmers' Union informed the Committee that the current position not only increases motor insurance premiums for farmers but means that, until the situation is rectified, farmers are required to have insurance for all vehicles used on private land. <BR /> <BR />The Association of British Insurers also highlighted the potential impact on police resources and on the potential threat posed to motor sport in Northern Ireland while the diversions remained. The view was supported by Motorsport UK in its evidence to the Committee. <BR /> <BR />I will go into much more detail on those issues during the Second Stage debate.”
“The Association of British Insurers supported that view. In its evidence session, it highlighted how drivers in Northern Ireland would be disadvantaged compared with drivers in Great Britain and the Republic of Ireland by being required to pay higher motor insurance costs.”
“The consequences of such a delay were outlined to the Committee not only by the Minister and Department but by the Motor Insurers' Bureau, the Association of British Insurers (ABI), Motorsport UK and, indeed, the Ulster Farmers' Union. <BR /> <BR />The Motor Insurers' Bureau informed the Committee of the need to avoid what is referred to as:”
“I will go into much more detail on the need for the legislation at Second Stage. For now, I will focus on the need for accelerated passage for the Bill. <BR /> <BR />The Minister outlined to the Committee that, were accelerated passage not to be granted, it would mean that, once the Westminster Bill completes its legislative passage, a discrepancy would exist between Northern Ireland's domestic legislation and the case law until our legislation was amended accordingly. Ultimately, that would mean that the Motor Insurers' Bureau would be vulnerable to claims that were brought by victims of incidents on private land and, potentially, to fraudulent claims. The Department informed the Committee that, in the absence of accelerated passage, the Bill would be delayed for up to one year.”
“I thank the Minister for her opening remarks. The Committee for Infrastructure first considered the proposal for the Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance) Bill at its meeting on 19 January 2022. At the meeting, the Minister outlined in detail the reasons why she seeks accelerated passage for the Bill. The Committee noted that the request for accelerated passage was also supported by the Executive. In advance of the oral evidence session, the Committee contacted a number of stakeholders that provided written evidence on the need for the legislation and the need to progress it urgently. The Committee has, therefore, been able to undertake considerable pre-legislative scrutiny, which highlighted the need for the legislation and the need for the Bill to pass by accelerated passage.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Does she agree that the vast network of second-hand car dealers has faced significant challenges in accessing MOTs to enable them to sell cars? It would be important to hear an update from the Minister on her engagement with that sector at this difficult time.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. He has touched on a very important point that has been of great concern to the Committee. There are young people who have waited, perhaps, for a year to get their test. They are experiencing mental anxiety and, unfortunately, due to nerves, may fail the test and have to wait for a time, paying again for lessons, with no test available in the short term. That adds to their anxiety and fear, and it is a huge concern.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. He has raised some of the issues to which he sees there being innovative solutions. Does he agree that it would be unfair for anyone to criticise the Committee for criticising but not offering solutions? As Mr Beggs pointed out, it is on record that the Committee has offered solutions, whether on temporary certificates, an increase in the number of testers or the other solutions that the Member raised. There is also the idea of a reserve list for those who, having waited a long time to get into the queue, fail their test and are put to the back of the queue again.”
“Will the Member give way on the creative solutions?”
“That has taken the Committee to this point. We felt that, because we were getting nowhere with the Department through constant back-and-forth correspondence, by bringing the motion to the House, we could plead with the Minister to think and talk creatively and to bring forward creative solutions with the resources that she has. The Committee asks that she and the Department get off the merry-go-round of chasing the backlogs and try to get out in front of the crisis for the sake of the individuals who are concerned and for our economy. On that basis, I commend the motion to the House.”
“The backlog, however, remained. The reason given to the Committee for that was that demand for services had increased. That is the same demand as the Committee had warned the Minister of and asked her to put measures in place to address from the beginning of the pandemic. <BR /> <BR />The Committee for Infrastructure has tirelessly asked questions and heard evidence, but the backlogs remain and are causing hardship and stress. As Committee Chair, I, for one, can speak of several examples of young people keen to get into the workplace and keen to contribute to their household being held back by their inability to secure a driving test. That is not prevalent in just my area — at Craigavon test centre, for example — and I know that other members, going by the experiences expressed at the Committee, have had similar issues.”
“I know that the Minister has been on record at each Committee meeting emphasising that it is not a perfect scenario and that, in a sense, there is still a significant issue to be dealt with in relation to backlogs. <BR /> <BR />By 26 July 2021, the DVA was able to reinstate normal vehicle testing times and advised the Committee that, since then, it had been able to maintain vehicle testing capacity by adopting a range of measures including the recruitment of additional vehicle examiners, the use of overtime to provide cover for leave and sick absence and a reduction in the vehicle test appointment time. On 28 October last year, the DVA advised the Committee that it had conducted 117,907 full vehicle tests in August and September — 96% of the five-year average for those months. Again, that progress is to be applauded.”
“Individuals were not able to take up work, businesses could not get staff into roles where driving was a requirement and increasing numbers of cars were being left with no MOT and were falling foul of insurance companies and, worryingly, the PSNI. <BR /> <BR />That is not to say that the Minister and the Department did nothing in the face of that pressure from the Committee and the public. Temporary exemption certificate (TEC) schemes were put in place; there were discussions with the PSNI and insurance companies about enforcement; and opening hours at test centres were extended. Eventually, there was the recruitment of new staff. That is to be applauded, and I will do so publicly on the Floor of the Assembly as the Chair of the Committee. The backlogs, however, have continued, and the issues have remained.”
“That was in September 2020. The Committee continued to have briefings on the issue: on 4 November 2020, 20 January 2021, 21 April 2021 and 10 June 2021. I could go on and on. <BR /> <BR />The Committee has spoken about DVA testing and driving tests continuously because of the legitimate concerns of Members across the House about the impact of delays and backlogs on individual constituents. At almost every meeting, the Committee agreed to write to the Department for updates and more information. Every time, the Committee emphasised the public concern about the growing backlogs. As time went on, it was not just about the backlogs: it was becoming clear that there were huge difficulties behind the backlogs.”
“estimate from previous years, due to COVID. That was a fundamental mistake. There was an error in risk management and crisis planning. There was an acknowledgement that there would be a backlog but no understanding of what was coming down the line. At the early Committee meeting, when Committee member after Committee member asked about the rationale, they were informed that working from home restrictions made it difficult to know what numbers were coming down the track. At that meeting, the Committee asked about the employment of new examiners and was informed:”
“What about all those who would normally have been added to the list in the intervening months? Given that the Minister had indicated that fewer tests could be conducted per day due to COVID restrictions, how would the backlog be dealt with? The response from the Minister and her officials at that time was that they had not extrapolated how many tests they expected to receive. Members asked the Minister to look at the average intake in previous years and were told:”
“The reinstatement of driving tests began in July 2020. Motorbike driving testing resumed from 6 July 2020, as did driver theory tests, with safe social distancing in place. The Minister outlined that, as of 1 September 2020, around 200 key workers, including doctors, nurses and front-line workers, would be tested first, followed by approximately 3,800 customers, most of whom were young people who had had their tests cancelled, to ensure that they were not inconvenienced further. <BR /> <BR />At that time, the Minister and her officials assured the Committee that all was in hand, a plan was in operation and the backlog was a priority. At that meeting 18 months ago, the Committee tested that assertion. The Committee asked about the backlog of 3,800 customers. Surely the backlog was bigger than those whose test had been cancelled.”
“Shortly after the initial lockdown in spring 2020, the Committee requested that the Minister provide oral evidence on the impact on DVA services. The Minister and her officials came to the Committee on 3 September 2020 to discuss the issues, the first of many briefings on the problem. During the briefing, the Minister acknowledged the challenges for the DVA, the fact that the lockdown had created a backlog in its services and, now that services had recommenced, the real need to deal with that backlog. <BR /> <BR />During the briefing, the Committee discussed with the Minister how she intended to tackle the backlog, which, all Committee members realised, was a growing concern. The Minister said that, after the initial lockdown, the DVA began to resume services in June 2020 with mitigations and social distancing in place.”
“I stand as the Chair of the Committee for Infrastructure to speak to the motion and to commend it to the House. <BR /> <BR />I wish to acknowledge the difficulties that DVA staff have faced during the pandemic, trying, as they have done, to continue the vital work of carrying out driving tests, vehicle tests and other important services. I can safely speak for the Committee when I say that, like many during this period, they rose to the challenge in difficult circumstances and their efforts should be commended. <BR /> <BR />Since the beginning of the pandemic, the Committee for Infrastructure has engaged with the Minister and her officials on the impact of COVID on her Department, specifically on the work of the DVA. Prior to my time as Committee Chair, the Committee engaged in the matter extensively.”
“We need to remember that 90% of deaths in Northern Ireland during the Troubles were caused by paramilitaries. Everyone deserves justice. Let us think of Teebane, La Mon, Bloody Friday and Enniskillen. Some want to tarnish the memory of the RUC. For those who were wrong, the vast majority will call them out for what it was. I, for one, am proud and grateful for their diligent service in the protection of the citizens of Northern Ireland through some very dark and difficult days.”
“<BR /> <BR />Sadly, today, in 2022, we continually see an attempt to compare today's standards of policing operations with what was happening in a chaotic time in this province's history. It is important that I put that on record because I come from a family with members who have served in the law institutions and forces that protected this country through some very dark and difficult days. I think of the nine officers killed in the Newry mortar bomb attack. I think of Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and Robert Buchanan, who were lured to their death in the Irish Republic, yet many have fallen silent in their pursuit of justice for them. Many former RUC officers are scarred by what they saw during the Troubles. They lost friends and family and had to live in constant fear.”
“I, again, put on record my membership of the Northern Ireland Policing Board as I rise to speak on what is, no doubt, a very difficult day for the families involved with the Sean Graham bookmakers. I think of those families because, no doubt, this has brought back some very painful memories of a very difficult time. Equally, I look towards many former serving RUC officers and families who are equally disturbed and annoyed by the memories of their loved ones that this incident brings to their doorstep. Let us not forget that 300 RUC officers were killed during the Troubles while performing a duty of law and order to defend and protect the people of Northern Ireland. Over 280 of those officers were killed by republican terrorists. How many inquiries or reports did they get, and how many of their killers were brought to justice?”
“— over key issues like reform of our health service. That is why we need to resolve these issues now. My warning to those who do not agree is that —”
“Businesses and consumers have to abide by rules made by a foreign power without their input or consent. It has added the insult of disenfranchising an entire community — the unionist community. <BR /> <BR />Many Members here want to talk about how the Belfast Agreement is a settlement for peace in Northern Ireland. At the core of the Belfast Agreement is the principle of consent; a principle that was tossed in the dustbin by Europe and, indeed, by those involved in the design of the protocol. They have played fast and loose with the Northern Ireland settlement, so we will not accept the artificial outrage of some parties in the House. <BR /> <BR />Concerns have been expressed about the lack of a functioning Executive —”
“The hypocrisy and double standards are staggering. Sinn Féin would collapse this place in a heartbeat over narrow pet projects like the Irish language, for example, but is happy to ignore the Irish Sea border, which is a threat to the prosperity of everyone everywhere. <BR /> <BR />We have heard much from the other parties in the past few days about democracy being denied, and there has been talk of unionists imposing their will on nationalists. Remember that certain nationalists in the House would not even consent to the planting of a tree or a rose bush to mark the centenary of Northern Ireland, and, indeed, this is also Her Majesty's platinum jubilee year. Well, I have news for them: the protocol and the Irish Sea border are completely undemocratic.”
“There has been a lot of posturing and revisionism in the House today. Some are mystified by unionist outrage at the Northern Ireland protocol. It is important, for the record of the House, to say that the Irish Sea border does not have the support of a single elected representative in this place. There are those in the House who simply expect unionism to stand idly by whilst they call for the rigorous implementation of an Irish Sea border. They would have us do nothing in the face of the continuing economic and constitutional carnage that the protocol is causing, but what if the shoe was on the other foot? <BR /> <BR />Last Thursday, the Sinn Féin Member for Upper Bann told 'Good Morning Ulster' that Sinn Féin will:”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee will continue to explore this issue in some detail, given the huge costs involved in the production of clean water. The Committee also sought assurances that greater efforts will be put into raising public awareness of the need to save water, not just during periods of water shortage but all year round. <BR /> <BR />The funding of NI Water is a live issue. It is one that my Committee is very cognisant of and continues to explore at every opportunity. Next week, the Committee will hear from Northern Ireland Water on its financial situation and will continue to drill down into that budget. <BR /> <BR />The Committee for Infrastructure supports the statutory rule.”
“We were advised that NI Water has invested in renewable generation capacity, with 57 solar sites now installed across Northern Ireland, alongside existing hydro capacity and generation of electricity from sludge. <BR /> <BR />The Committee was pleased to hear that NI Water generates approximately 13 GW of electricity per annum from outside sources and that its energy-related projects have delivered an additional £4·5 million to £5 million of annual recurring benefit from the PC15 period for the business. Northern Ireland Water has advised that energy is identified as a key business improvement focus area, with a range of efficiency measures and revenue-generating opportunities delivered and explored.”
“The Committee asked the officials about the impact of recent energy price increases and were advised that the subsidy was calculated before prices started to spike. The Committee explored with the officials and in writing what actions Northern Ireland Water can undertake to reduce its energy consumption. <BR /> <BR />The Committee has been advised that NI Water has delivered a number of energy-efficient and cost-reduction projects over the PC15 period and continues to develop and implement opportunities for improvement within the current regulatory time period and price period. Those projects include measures such as time-of-day optimisation in order to avail itself of electricity at off-peak times in order to support the reduction or curtailment of wind energy and to avail itself of cheaper electricity prices.”
“The Committee was content that the subsidy, which was drafted between the Department and Northern Ireland Water with the agreement of the Utility Regulator, is based on a clear methodology and in regulation. Furthermore, the Committee was satisfied to hear that the subsidy methodology is based on what is affordable for customers and what is necessary in order to deliver water and sewerage services in an efficient way. The officials advised the Committee that no consultation had been carried out on the legislation as there is no change to policy. <BR /> <BR />One of the Committee's major concerns was the impact of current increases in energy prices. Members may be aware that Northern Ireland Water is Northern Ireland's largest consumer of electricity.”
“The officials explained, to the satisfaction of the Committee, that the five-year time period is so that it ties in with the Assembly's election cycle and gives the Department and, ultimately, the Executive time in the next mandate to instigate the necessary work to consider alternatives to the subsidy and to bring forward legislation, should that be considered appropriate. <BR /> <BR />The Committee sought clarification regarding how the amount of the subsidy is calculated. The officials advised the Committee that the subsidy is calculated in agreement with Northern Ireland Water and the Utility Regulator through the price control process.”
“As Members are aware, the subsidy in lieu of water charges is an Executive policy, and the Committee supports the statutory rule. In line with their scrutiny role, however, and with due diligence, Committee members were rigorous in their engagement with officials on the detail of the rule. <BR /> <BR />I will now briefly outline the Committee's considerations. The Committee sought assurances from departmental officials about the rationale for the five-year subsidy period.”
“On behalf of the Committee, I wish the Minister a speedy recovery. <BR /> <BR />As Chairperson of the Committee for Infrastructure, I wish to take the opportunity to speak on the draft Grants to Water and Sewerage Undertakers Order (Northern Ireland) 2022. The purpose of the rule is to extend the period during which the Department will pay a subsidy to NI Water in lieu of domestic water charging. The Minister has adequately provided a detailed explanation of the content of the statutory rule, and I do not propose to repeat that. <BR /> <BR />The Department made the Committee aware of the proposal for the statutory rule on 18 October 2021, and it was considered by the Committee at its meeting on 24 November 2021, with a briefing from departmental officials.”
“I welcome the additional allocations to the Department for Infrastructure. Again, I echo the calls saying that it is scandalous that we see no additional resource for road repairs, given the state of some of our roads. <BR /> <BR />Can the Minister tell us about NI Water funding? Obviously, the funding released by the January monitoring round is welcome, but, given the huge energy costs associated with NI Water and the current fluctuations in energy prices, is there a means for the Minister to revisit that if Northern Ireland Water finds itself in a distressing scene in the months ahead?”
“I agree with the Member for North Down's call for urgency in the delivery of the subregional stadia funding. There is no doubt that the hampering of funding is affecting the progression and modernisation of many local clubs. The Minister will know that, with costs for the eventual end-project delivery of Casement Park spiralling, there is, rightly, a call for increased funding from the GAA. Does the Minister agree with her stand-in and predecessor, Carál Ní Chuilín, who said that it was no longer "tenable" for the GAA to hold the position that it would not increase its funding allocation?”
“On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Just last week, the Speaker of the House of Commons and, indeed, more worryingly, MI5, issued an alert to Members of Parliament warning them that an agent of the Chinese state, named as Christine Lee, is engaged in political interference on behalf of the Chinese Communist Party. Understandably, that has given rise to considerable concern that perhaps Chinese state political interference is more widespread, including in these institutions. Has the Speaker's Office reached out to or received any briefings from the PSNI or other national security organisations regarding the activities of Christine Lee or other agents of the Chinese Communist Party in this institution?”
“The Minister will know that there is huge public scepticism in the ability of the Department for Infrastructure to deliver on major road infrastructure projects. The A5 was mentioned earlier. Some £60 million has been spent on that and not a bit of tar has been laid. Also, £21·4 million has been spent on the York Street interchange, and no progress has been made on that project. Does the Minister agree that that is an important infrastructure project? What confidence could anyone reading the draft Budget have in the delivery of key projects such as the York Street interchange?”
“The deputy First Minister's script seems to have forgotten the three years in which her and her party tore Stormont down for their own political end. But anyway. <BR /> <BR />Talking about the British-Irish Council meeting that was hosted by the Welsh Government, the deputy First Minister rightly outlined that COVID recovery was a key part of the discussions. The deputy First Minister may be aware of the huge burden that has been placed on businesses by COVID certification and of the fact that the hospitality trade is talking about its Christmas takings being down by over 40%. Should those businesses receive compensation or assistance from some form of scheme to help them through what will be a very difficult time?”
“While I welcome the US Secretary of State's letter opposing the amnesty proposals from Her Majesty's Government, will the deputy First Minister agree that there are those in the United States who simply cannot wash their hands of culpability in relation to the legacy issues that we face, as many of them funded illegal organisations such as the Provisional IRA for many years?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I appreciate the positive way in which he has engaged with us in the debate. Clause 2 deals with trail hunting. As the Bill sponsor, the Member will be able to clarify that the Bill seeks to make illegal trail hunting but not drag hunting. That is my understanding. Can the Member define for the House the differences between the two? Some in the House did not know that when they spoke earlier. On that point, how would the police differentiate between the two? Have you given any thought to that?”
“If we need to address the issue in the future — as I have mentioned, there have been times in the past when the Assembly has got this right — I urge Members to do so on the basis of evidence and principle, with the collective aim of addressing animal welfare rather than controlling human behaviour.”