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 29 of 46.
“I will if I have time at the end of my contribution. <BR /> <BR />There will always be people on each side of the argument who will never agree, who will never see the opposing point of view and who will never compromise. However, those are two minority groups. The vast majority of people on both sides feel strongly about animal welfare, but they also realise that wild animals need to be controlled and that that must be done in the most humane ways possible. The BiIl would seriously restrict the ability to manage wild animals whilst doing absolutely nothing for animal welfare. I therefore urge colleagues to vote against the Bill.”
“I equally support — you will not say "Shame" to this point, Mr Stalford — robust police action against those who partake in illegal forms of hunting, such as the example that you noted in your contribution. I can tell you that law-abiding huntsmen and huntswomen across this country equally condemn those in full measure. It does not have to be a debate in which one side wins and the other side loses. That is a situation that certain campaigning groups want us to be in.”
“However, such surveys only reflect a perception and do not explain other methods of wildlife management or pest control, which would inevitably increase and which the public would find equally offensive. The job of an MLA is to analyse the issues in detail, study the Bill in detail and legislate on the basis of evidence and fact, not prejudice or perception. <BR /> <BR />Members, I support legitimate, law-abiding hunting activity.”
“Such evidence that we have indicates that previously hunted species in many areas are viewed very differently by farmers and landowners, with the result that a community-based conservation process has now just become one of pest control, often with healthy animals being killed instead of the weak, injured or diseased and in far greater numbers. That is not productive wildlife management; again, it is virtue signalling. <BR /> <BR />The hunting bans in the rest of the United Kingdom are not only detrimental to animal welfare but damaging to conservation. I can well understand why members of the public, who, in the main, are unfamiliar with hunting and might not like the idea of that activity — Members may not like it — will sign petitions or respond negatively to public opinion polls.”
“I come to an important point. All that I have said up until now would be diminished or, indeed, irrelevant if the welfare of the animals that were previously hunted in England, Wales and Scotland had improved. Yet, with all the significant sums of money that have been spent on campaigning for laws to ban hunting and the subsequent cost to the public purse for police and court time, not a single penny — not one — has been spent by any anti-hunting group to assess the impact of those laws. That, in itself, speaks volumes. Surely, such critical and crucial research would put an end to the hunting controversy once and for all. Do those groups suspect what is really happening to the wild animals that they supposedly care for and that their case is fundamentally flawed?”
“Next, it will be the man or woman with their gun and their dog, followed by the angler and their rod. I realise that that may not be the intention of Mr Blair, but I assure the House that that is the very intention of some of the advocates of the Bill. The only reason that the rat — the common rat; vermin — has been excluded from the Bill is that, frankly, it was not deemed cute and cuddly enough to be included. It did not fit the narrative. As Members, we must do what is right. We must look at the legislation and deem whether it is fit for purpose. If the principle of the Bill is that sport or recreation has no place in the management of wildlife, then, clearly, shooting, falconry and angling will all be on the list for banning in the near future. Make no mistake about that.”
“The Bill seeks to ban trail hunting, which was the point that I tried to raise to my colleague and friend Mr Stalford. Quite how the police will be expected to distinguish between the different types of scent that are used by a legal drag hunt and an illegal trail hunt is anyone's guess. That point has not been explained in the House today. <BR /> <BR />I speak directly to Members and to country sports enthusiasts across Northern Ireland: today, by means of this Bill, the anti-hunting lobby seeks to ban the huntsman and huntswoman and their hound.”
“That point was emphasised by the law lord Lord Bonomy in 2016, when he commissioned the Scottish Government review of the law there. Why it was ever thought that limiting that process to just two dogs was better than three or four dogs, or, perhaps, a pack, is unclear. There is certainly no scientific or veterinary basis for that number, apart from the very obvious fact that it curbs the use of hounds. <BR /> <BR />Dogs are used in a variety of country sports. The Member said that he has no desire to stop any activity other than the killing of wild mammals by dogs. I take his sincere point in that regard. However, the Bill, as drafted, bears no relation to that promise. Shooting will be affected through the work of gamekeepers and dogs, which are used in numerous ways in other sports.”
“Hunting with scented hounds adheres perfectly to the aims of genuine wildlife management. It leaves a smaller but healthier quarry population and achieves that in a way that is natural for the hunter and the hunted. The Bill ignores all those points. Quite frankly, it is so poorly drafted that, under it, every dog owner in Northern Ireland could become a criminal for simply letting their dog do what dogs do. In other words, the Bill attempts to legislate against a dog's most basic and natural instinct: to scent and hunt. <BR /> <BR />The Bill also ignores peer-reviewed research that shows that flushing foxes to guns using a full pack of hounds is more effective than using just two dogs, as the Hunting Act in England and Wales demands.”
“Could it be — I dare to suggest it — because the scientific and veterinary evidence against hunting with dogs simply does not exist? I know that some Members might not like to hear this, but the veterinary evidence is in support of hunting. The Veterinary Association for Wildlife Management states:”
“We should be learning from the mistakes that other parts of the United Kingdom have made, not blindly following for some dubious virtue-signalling reason. However, the legislators here in Northern Ireland resolved the issue many years ago, when legislation that protected animal welfare and the right to hunt coexisted. The law permitted the prosecution of anyone, including hunt supporters, if unnecessary suffering to an animal had been caused. It is highly significant that, during those years, not one prosecution was brought forward. It has been argued by the Alliance Party and others that that was because the legislation was flawed, but how? If the evidence of unnecessary suffering, such as what we have heard today from some in the House, had existed, there would have been no bar to legal action.”
“Does the vast cost to the taxpayer in police and court time not make the Member think again about following that path, or does he believe that an opinion poll that supports his Bill, in which, literally, anyone, anywhere in the world, could take part, and which received a paltry 18,000 responses, is a sound basis for enacting legislation? I saw responses from as far away as Arizona in the United States of America and from other European cities. Do they understand the unique circumstances and nature of the Northern Ireland countryside? I ask Members to think about that. <BR /> <BR />To argue that a ban on the use of hunting dogs is somehow justified simply because the rest of the United Kingdom has enacted similar disastrous laws is as pointless as it is ill-founded.”
“<BR /> <BR />The reasons for proposing legislation along the lines of the Hunting of Wild Mammals Bill appear to be as vague as they are misguided. Has the Member not witnessed the turmoil that has taken place in England, Wales and Scotland as a result of the two laws that seek to ban hunting with dogs — something that is still not resolved all these years later? Has he not listened to judges, legal experts, veterinarians, senior police officers, animal welfare experts, senior civil servants, countless country people and the Prime Minister of the day, who shares his name, all of whom have criticised those laws? Does he casually dismiss the view of the senior parliamentary counsel who was asked to draft the Bill that became the Hunting Act 2004? He said:”
“I begin by placing on record my membership of the all-party group on country sports. Be under no illusion, however, I speak on this issue today as a representative MLA and a keen conservationist and country sports enthusiast. <BR /> <BR />During my lifetime, I have had the opportunity to meet huntsmen and huntswomen and conservationists from Antrim to Kerry, Down to Donegal and everywhere in between. Hunting and countryside management have been an intrinsic part of the rural way of life across these islands for many years. I hope that, in the time afforded me today, I can correct some of the vile attempted character assassinations on many in the hunting community. I thank the Countryside Alliance, BASC and many others for their engagement with me on the Bill.”
“What is the difference between trail and drag hunting?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I know that he has a particular opinion on the Bill. He will realise that one of its most controversial aspects is clause 2, which provides for a ban on trail hunting. Does the Member know the difference between trail hunting and drag hunting, one of which is to be made illegal in the Bill and the other of which is to be kept legal? If he does, can he explain to the House how the police could differentiate between the two?”
“It is absolutely disgusting; it is harrowing, but yet there has been no condemnation or push for action from many elements of our society. The director general of the NCA said that in most cases, children are more at harm in their own homes and beds than they are on the street. How harrowing. Yet there is widespread silence on this issue. I found it particularly distressing when the director general of the NCA said that children as young as toddlers were being sexually abused in their homes by adults up to the age of 70-plus. Members, we have to do more. Collectively, we must attack this atrocity and protect our young people by placing them at the heart of any legislative programme going forward. We owe it to them. Too many are suffering in silence, and we must be their voice.”
“His fingers and toes were broken and the ligaments in his legs were torn. He is now wheelchair-bound because of the abuse he sustained in his household. <BR /> <BR />That leads me to the harrowing information that I heard at the Policing Board last Thursday. The National Crime Agency (NCA) director general was there and, for the first time, he revealed the numbers involved in sexual abuse in Northern Ireland. That was harrowing. The fact that very few media outlets reported it caused me a great deal of concern. He stated that there may be up to 23,000 individuals who are deemed as a sexual risk to children living in Northern Ireland. Members, I am sure that we can all agree that that figure is deeply disturbing. <BR /> <BR />The Chief Constable noted that the figure is equivalent to a small town of people.”
“I rise to continue with Mr McCrossan's points. While COVID demonstrated the very best of society, equally, what I and other Members have seen in the media in the past few weeks has demonstrated the sheer evil that exists in many parts of society today. First, there is the harrowing case of child abuse that Mr McCrossan mentioned: Arthur Labinjo-Hughes, a six-year-old who was mentally abused and then physically abused. It is absolutely harrowing for anyone to listen to. <BR /> <BR />As politicians and, indeed, as a society, we should, first and foremost, protect our children, but the cases that we have seen on the news sadly show that there is severe mistrust of the parental relationship with a child in society. I listened to the story of young Tony Hudgell, who was attacked when he was a baby.”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. I welcome the task force, because I think that all Members, both in the report and their contributions, noted the dire state of the charging infrastructure. We all need to get behind that in order to advance it. <BR /> <BR />The Minister mentioned hydrogen, and, obviously, it is a key commitment for her, and it is an exciting development. Will the Minister consider, perhaps, a hydrogen task force to look at the issues pertaining to that industry, particularly in its fledgling years, to ensure that we have the infrastructure in place to meet the need?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. While the focus of the report is on EV in particular, I share the Member's enthusiasm for the potentially exciting market of green hydrogen in Northern Ireland. Will he agree that there is still a lot of concern among green hydrogen enthusiasts about how slowly our planning system is adapting to that growing market? The Committee visited Wrightbus just two weeks ago. There is huge potential in the market, but it feels that planning and the Department simply do not move quickly enough to meet the needs of that exciting sector.”
“The Committee says to all Departments that, on the issue, there is no scope to say, "Do as we say, not as we do". The public sector must lead by example. Therefore, the Committee for Infrastructure recommends that the Northern Ireland Executive make a commitment that, where possible and practical, zero emission vehicles are the first choice. <BR /> <BR />I hope that, in the time available, I have given Members a sense of the Committee's deliberations and the rationale for its recommendations. I commend the report to the House and call for the Minister for Infrastructure and Executive colleagues to implement the recommendations contained therein.”
“For that to happen, a funding package should be agreed that will bring the Northern Ireland charging network up to a fit-for-purpose and future-proofed standard. Therefore, the Committee recommends that the Department for Infrastructure engages with current and potential energy providers and other partners, particularly councils, to develop a charging infrastructure strategy and to agree a plan to fund it. Furthermore, the Department for Infrastructure should establish itself as the lead body for identifying and supporting available funding streams for charging. <BR /> <BR />When the Committee heard from Departments about their plans for vehicles within their remit, the state of readiness and forethought was a mixed bag, to say the least.”
“The Committee came to the conclusion that confusion over which public body or bodies should lead on the issue may be leading to missed opportunities for drawing down funding. The Committee felt that funding opportunities may be going to waste through a lack of experience or knowledge in councils etc and that more engagement and coordination was needed to agree priorities. Therefore, DFI should engage with the Office for Zero Emission Vehicles, the Energy Saving Trust and councils to ensure that the unique circumstances of Northern Ireland are considered. <BR /> <BR />Our evidence shows that early public investment in infrastructure is necessary to stimulate EV uptake. It is only when that is at a sufficient level that a shift to private-sector operation, with decreasing government support, will occur.”
“Such is the disillusionment with the infrastructure that those who made the investment to buy EV said that they were thinking of reverting. To that end, the Committee recommends that the Department for Infrastructure engages immediately with EV owners to ensure that their views and experiences are built into an upgraded electric vehicle charging network. <BR /> <BR />I turn to finding 5. The Committee considered evidence for available funding streams for decarbonisation, in particular from the Office for Zero Emission Vehicles (OZEV). It notes that there is no commitment for the funding to continue beyond the end of next year. There seems to be little coordination in the availing of funding opportunities.”
“Finding 4 returns to the provision of EV charging infrastructure. The Committee acknowledges that the Department for Infrastructure has commissioned work to establish what charging infrastructure is needed in Northern Ireland, including where it should be located and the type of charging points that should be used. There is also a proposal for an EV infrastructure plan. <BR /> <BR />The Committee's survey and our call for evidence found consensus that the public charging infrastructure in Northern Ireland was inadequate for current demands and was only a fraction of what would be required if there was a significant uptake of EV in the coming years. One respondent to the survey commented:”
“The knock-on effect of that disincentive is the lack of a used EV market in Northern Ireland. As the House of Commons Select Committee on Transport has highlighted, a healthy used electric vehicle market has an important role in widening access to EV. Our report points to a growing recognition of that fact in many jurisdictions, leading to policies for the provision of grants or loans to support market entry. The Committee therefore recommends that the Executive bring forward measures to support and develop the used electric vehicle market in Northern Ireland. <BR />.”
“On the other hand, as evidenced in the report, the charging infrastructure is inadequate, and, therefore, there is no incentive to persuade individuals to make the move to EVs, which the Committee has spent considerable time studying. <BR /> <BR />Northern Ireland's EV market has increased over the last 10 years. Although it has done so at a slower rate than the rest of the United Kingdom, it has grown at different rates throughout Northern Ireland. I am aware that all politics is local, so I draw Members' attention to map 1 in the report. The more rural the area, the less access there is to charging and, therefore, the less incentive there is to purchase an electric vehicle, given the much more complex journey plans when commuting from a rural location.”
“The Committee for Infrastructure recommends that the Department establish a new focus on transport decarbonisation and ensure that the necessary personnel and resources are in place to develop and implement the required plans. Furthermore, a clear timeline should be identified for when relevant policies and plans are expected to be in place. <BR /> <BR />I move on to finding 3. Members will be aware that a circular conundrum is at play with respect to the move to electric vehicles (EVs). On the one hand, they are prohibitively expensive for most people — a fact that will change only as uptake increases and economies of scale drive prices down.”
“To that end, the Committee for Infrastructure recommends that the Department for Infrastructure's regional transport strategy and its policies and investment plans should be updated and enhanced, with a clear focus on how they will contribute to net zero ambitions. <BR /> <BR />I move on to finding 2. The Department for Transport (DfT) lists a modal shift to public and active transport as its number-one strategic priority. In its transport decarbonisation plan, it states that public transport and active travel:”
“<BR /> <BR />In its consideration of the Audit Office's 2015 report on the effectiveness of public transport in Northern Ireland, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) called for investment and innovation and a stronger vision and leadership to deliver that modal shift. Six years later, this Committee makes the same call today. That is not to say that work has not been ongoing. The Committee acknowledges the increased spending on active travel and the development of services such as the Glider in Belfast in order to provide alternatives to car journeys. However, a holistic and long-term strategy is needed to guide our efforts.”
“The report brings together an analysis of the evidence and the Infrastructure Committee's conclusions and recommendations. I will now outline its main findings. <BR /> <BR />I start with finding 1. As outlined in the report, in 2019, Northern Ireland's greenhouse gas emissions were estimated to be 21·4 million tons, 20% of which was from transport. The main source of those emissions was petrol and diesel vehicles on our roads. Furthermore, our evidence showed that over 70% of journeys were taken by car and that that had hardly changed in the last 20 years. We need a modal shift — a move away from car journeys to public transport and active travel, while recognising the rural aspects of our society and, in particular, the difficulties that rural people face with public transport options.”
“<BR /> <BR />At its meeting on 3 March 2021, the Committee for Infrastructure agreed to conduct an inquiry into the ambition to decarbonise road transport in Northern Ireland and our readiness to meet the Government's plans to prohibit the sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 and plug-in hybrids from 2035. In order to gather evidence, the Committee conducted an online survey of the public and made a call for evidence from stakeholders involved in road transport, such as public transport operators, road haulage operators, public sector fleet managers and the 11 councils. The Committee also commissioned a series of research papers from the Assembly's Research and Information Service (RaISe) and took oral evidence from the Department and its stakeholders.”
“I commend the motion to the House. I rise as Chair of the Committee for Infrastructure to speak on the Committee's report on its inquiry into the decarbonisation of road transport in Northern Ireland. The Committee commends the report to Members but specifically asks for the endorsement of the House for its recommendations, which, taken together, seek a clear and detailed plan for moving towards 2030, when the sale of new petrol and diesel vehicles will be prohibited. I will outline the specifics of the recommendations, but first I will outline the work of the Department and, indeed, the Committee in coming to its conclusions.”
“The scourge of human trafficking is still an all too common sight on our streets, and my thoughts are with all who have been affected by it. Will the Minister outline the support packages that exist to help those who have been the subject of human trafficking? Does she believe that the police are doing enough to end that scourge?”
“How has the Department arrived at a place where we have so many legal disputes ongoing? Will the Minister commit to a judge-led inquiry to ensure that we never have so many legal challenges affecting our rural road network across Northern Ireland?”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. Legal disputes sound boring, but this is deeply serious. This is about the taxpayer in County Tyrone, County Down and elsewhere being unable to get substandard roads resurfaced. For many, the traffic-calming in those areas has become the potholes, and it will become even more worrying as we reach winter with the damage that that can inflict on our rural road network.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. My apologies, but I was caught up in another meeting about the Southern Trust. As that was the issue, I know that the Minister will not mind. <BR /> <BR />I thank the Minister for her statement. This is a huge issue for the Committee, which has just completed an inquiry into decarbonisation of road transport. The Minister's statement referred to a paper prepared by the transport work sector on the electrification of vehicles. Can the Committee and the Assembly be provided with that paper, or will she expand on its content? <BR /> <BR />There are a lot of good intentions in the statement, but was any thought given to private funding streams for the private sector and councils in order to incentivise the move towards electrification?”
“I thank the Royal British Legion for its steadfast support of the veterans and the volunteers in this country. It is through them that we remember those who have gone before us and will ensure that their memory is never forgotten.”
“I can think of some very poignant ones in my own constituency, whether in Portadown, Lurgan, Banbridge or further afield. We owe so much to the volunteers who have helped by being guardians of remembrance and by supporting our veteran community through a very difficult time.”
“As, sadly, we see the World War II generation move on, there is now a time for active acts of remembrance for more-modern-day conflicts. To this day, there are veterans who suffer from the trauma and aftermath of war. They get that support through the help and support of the Royal British Legion. <BR /> <BR />Yesterday was also the 100th anniversary of the Poppy Appeal. The Poppy Appeal began in 1921, when the symbol of the poppy was taken on as the mark of remembrance. That is not only the case here; it is recognised across the world. It has had a great impact by raising millions for veterans and their families as they cope with the aftermath of war. Any Member across the House should be able to reflect on one of the 40,000 volunteers across the United Kingdom who have sold poppies on our street to support our veteran community.”
“Remembrance Sunday is a very poignant day for many people in our society. It is a chance to reflect on and remember the sacrifice of so many across not only this country but the world. It took on extra emphasis yesterday, when the Royal British Legion marked its centenary year. That is a remarkable achievement for an organisation that was founded by Field Marshal Haig, 1st Earl Haig, which has over 2,500 branches across the United Kingdom. That charity provides financial, social and emotional support to veterans and their families, and I know that many are indebted to the service that the Royal British Legion and its volunteers provide to our community. <BR /> <BR />The Royal British Legion has taken on the role of the guardian of remembrance.”
“On a point of order, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker. During questions, the Member for Strangford Ms Armstrong, made accusations towards me and other Members on the DUP Benches about sniggering during the debate, which was on a very serious topic. I note to you, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, that every single Member who asked a question during Question Time outrightly condemned the attacks on bus drivers in Belfast and Newtownards. It is a slight on me and on other Members to suggest or imply otherwise.”
“I thank the Minister for coming to the House and for her answers thus far. I want to put on record my condemnation of the attacks on Translink property and the buses in particular. Those drivers carry out a vital function for the public, and our thoughts are with all Translink staff. In light of the recent attacks, will the Minister update the House on the police assessment of the current threat level towards Translink staff and drivers on bus services and on progress towards the normalisation of services?”
“When it comes to representation on public bodies, are the days of "No Protestant need apply" over in Sinn Féin?”
“It is not 1969, so I will bring the deputy First Minister back to 2012. When referencing discrimination, did the deputy First Minister or, indeed, Mary Lou have a word with her colleague, Conor Murphy? In 2012, he became the only Executive Minister ever to be found guilty of discrimination on the basis of religion, which, in that case, was against a Protestant. The tribunal said that, during Mr Murphy's time as Regional Development Minister between 2007 and 2011, there was:”
“The Minister will be acutely aware of the hurt and distress that delays to the payment have caused to victims of Troubles-related incidents. Will the Minister assure the House that no further delay is anticipated for new applicants coming forward? Will she update the House on the progress of appointing a victims' commissioner?”
“On a point of order, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, as Chair of the Committee for Infrastructure, I place on record that it is unacceptable that Members are in the House to hear a statement from the Infrastructure Minister and yet, to date, we have not received that statement, never mind that the business of the House has been impacted by a delay in that statement coming before the Assembly.”
“I thank the Minister for his answers thus far, and I thank the Department for its roll-out of the scheme. I have no doubt that it will be an economic stimulus to many of the businesses that have been impacted so hard by COVID-19. Will the Minister agree that it was disgraceful for the chief commissioner at the Equality Commission to come on the radio and make ill-informed and outrageous comments about the scheme, serving only to sow seeds of confusion and doubt? Will the Minister further clarify and give assurances to the House that no legitimate applicant has been rejected or will be rejected from this scheme?”
“Will the Minister provide clarity on whether she asked for the ministerial code to be amended at any point prior to my letter of 25 October?”