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 5 of 46.
“I will in a moment. <BR /> <BR />Our families and farmers are working hard to feed the nation, yet the left-wing ideologues in this place want to tax the industry to death through incompetent, crippling inheritance tax and unrealistic environmental policies. Those parties are more concerned with cows burping than with farmers breaking even. <BR /> <BR />I will give way to the SDLP to see whether it has a solution to the matter.”
“The SDLP's policy positions and, indeed, the orchestra of incompetence in Alliance, Sinn Féin and the Green Party have led to laws under which tadpoles and bats have more rights than the unborn child. We have net zero policies that let everybody else drill in the North Sea while we import our energy from those countries at a higher price, giving us the highest energy prices in Europe, never mind stopping roads being built. We have a benefits system that undermines the incentive to work and in which those who do the right thing — they get up early and go to work — are taxed to the hilt, and they are simply asking, "What is the point?".”
“The motion tells us a lot about the SDLP, a party that loves to lecture us on how out of touch we all are and how it alone is the party with its finger on the pulse of Northern Ireland opinion. Yet, at a time when families struggle with the cost of living, waiting lists are dire, businesses face enormous pressure and people want government that is focused on delivery, what does the SDLP do? It chooses to propose a motion that laments the democratic election results in Scotland, England and Wales, rather than one on bread-and-butter issues. Is that the best that we can expect from the SDLP? Have a so-called lacklustre official Opposition run out of steam so early? <BR /> <BR />The motion warns about so-called right-wing populism, but people in Northern Ireland are already experiencing and living with the consequences of left-wing populism.”
“Will the Member clarify whether he is more aligned with the policies of the leader of the Green Party, who believes that, if he hypnotises women, their breasts enlarge?”
“They have a lack of confidence in the system. Can the Minister therefore give a cast-iron guarantee that the review that she announced today will ensure that child safety is the first priority, rather than offenders' convenience?”
“Minister, there is deep fear and anger about the housing of sexual offenders in local communities. That is not a new issue; it has always been of paramount concern. Despite the processes that you set out, quite often the reality does not match those processes, given that parents have seen sex offenders housed near schools, childcare facilities and public parks.”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. She will know that the overconcentration of houses in multiple occupation has greatly irritated not only my constituents but many constituents across Northern Ireland. Her Department is responsible for overseeing planning policy pertaining to HMOs in local councils. With only two of the 11 councils having bespoke policies to deal with overconcentration, does the Minister accept that its not being dealt with across the board is an issue, and is her Department providing enough information to ensure that councils are well equipped to deal with that major issue?”
“Those are the words of John chapter 3, verse 16. Just think of that. Other parties in the House have now criminalised the public preaching of those words in certain parts of Northern Ireland, in a nation that has been shaped by over 1,500 years of Christian truth and witness. <BR /> <BR />There are many concerning parts following this judgement. If preaching John chapter 3, verse 16 is capable of amounting to unlawful influence, what about carrying a Bible through a hospital? What about saying a prayer for an end-of-life patient? What about a carol service or speaking with a patient or family member in a ward or in the public area? Those things should not need legal advice. We hold Pastor Clive Johnston and the Christian Institute in our prayers as they tackle this issue.”
“We opposed it for the very reasons that there were serious concerns for religious and civil liberty. The DUP had prepared a petition of concern to stop the legislation. Sadly, it fell one short. We are a nation that has been shaped by a long tradition of constitutional, civil and religious liberty standards. Many of the freedoms enjoyed across the western world developed on these islands, yet, today, we find ourselves in the position where pastors are being criminalised under vague and expansive legislation. <BR /> <BR />Badly written laws have consequences far beyond that which was their first intention.”
“Last Thursday was a sad day for Northern Ireland. For the first time in living memory, we saw a pastor criminalised. It was not for violence, theft or scandalous misconduct — indeed, the judge himself recognised Pastor Clive Johnston as a man of good character. Pastor Johnston was convicted under the safe access zones legislation for preaching John chapter 3, verse 16 within a safe access zone. <BR /> <BR />I love it when this country is known around the world for the right reasons: excellence in sport, education or innovation. Yet, last week, for very wrong reasons, we made international headlines because a pastor was convicted for preaching John chapter 3, verse 16. <BR /> <BR />When that legislation came before the Assembly, my party — I spoke in the House — warned that it was bad law.”
“— and get behind the party that can win: the DUP.”
“It gloats in the fact that we will now have three nationalist First Ministers. There is no acknowledgment of the joint nature of the office in Northern Ireland and accountability. That is a sign of what is to come as Sinn Féin attempts to cover disaster after disaster in its Ministers' Departments. What about the cost-of-living crisis now? No, that is all for the optics; today is about driving a nationalist argument. The unionist majority in Scotland still prevails when it comes to voting intentions. The same is the case in Wales. The same is also the case in Northern Ireland, but the lesson for Northern Ireland is that split unionism will cost seats. Stop the nationalist narrative —”
“He should take responsibility not just for the Labour councillors and Members who were lost but for immigration. This country continues to see thousands upon thousands of people entering illegally and then being put up in accommodation paid for by the taxpayer. There is no responsibility in that regard from Labour. There is also no responsibility when it comes to taxing businesses to the point of extinction. Small businesses are being driven to the breadline by the Labour Government. What about their attack on pensioners? What about their attacks on farmers? Anybody who was unable to predict the results was living in a complete fantasy land. The message was written on the wall. <BR /> <BR />As sure as night follows day, what is the first thing that Sinn Féin does, in order to cover its progressive diversionary drivel?”
“Last week's elections provided a seismic opportunity for many people in parts of the United Kingdom to have their say on 20 months of a Labour Government in which we were promised so much but have seen so little. The electorate has had 20 months to make up its mind on the performance of Sir Keir Starmer. People asked, "What does this man stand for? Who actually is he?", and, by voting in their millions, they decided that Mr Starmer does not live up to his name. <BR /> <BR />Our Prime Minister talked this morning about taking responsibility for the loss of over 1,400 council seats and the loss of many Members of the Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly. He should ask why those seats were lost. He talks about, "Be better, do better".”
“The judgement also goes to the heart of the legacy issue in Northern Ireland, where there is still an intent by some people in the House and outside it to ensure that those who served the country with distinction, put on the uniform, defended liberty and defended civilians are no longer unjustly brought before the courts. <BR /> <BR />The Prime Minister must go further than just recognising the judgement: he must ensure that we end EU law supremacy in Northern Ireland. We have clarity on article 2. It is high time that the UK asserted itself over not only legal matters but economic matters.”
“It is important that we examine the issues by which certain people in the legal profession, the Equality Commission and the Human Rights Commission attempted to use that for the purpose of blocking potential important legislation in Northern Ireland that would ensure that we could control our borders and put to bed the blight of illegal and uncontrolled immigration. When it comes to the definition of "gender", my goodness, it is a landmark ruling for common sense. Those who have used their broad interpretation of article 2 have denied a Supreme Court ruling to Northern Ireland that was as basic as to say that, for the purposes of gender, there are but two: male and female. Those organisations now have to front up or leave the stage. Common sense must be applied in lawmaking in Northern Ireland.”
“The Supreme Court judgement is, no doubt, a landmark judgement for Northern Ireland. It goes to the very nub of who governs this place, whose laws we are accustomed to and what direction we follow. The Dillon judgement has proven to be a costly correction to those who have attempted at every turn to use article 2 of the Windsor framework to undermine UK sovereignty and lawmaking and to undermine common sense. <BR /> <BR />What did the judgement do? It stated in law that, for the purposes of rights, the given narrative from activist lawyers and activist organisations that attempted to use an expansionist view of article 2 to apply European rights in Northern Ireland over the head of UK law was wrong. That is important for a number of reasons.”
“<BR /> <BR />A gun that was used in the attack at Kingsmills was also used by Raymond McCreesh later in the 1970s. How has republicanism presented Raymond McCreesh? It named a play park after him. That proposal was supported by the SDLP. If we are going to debate and reflect on the legacy of the past, let us be truthful, let us not spin things, and let us remember that many people who served in this country did so to protect innocent life —”
“That does not excuse the actions of some, and, where there are appropriate means, they should be held accountable, but let us be real: there are huge double standards, and there is huge hypocrisy, when debating the issue in the Chamber. In Northern Ireland, 1972 was a barbaric year: over 400 people lost their lives in the Troubles, including many security service personnel. The double standards from Sinn Féin about that period are clear. We are told by the party opposite that there should be accountability, truth and transparency. When I attended the inquest into the killing of 10 innocent Protestant workmen at Kingsmills, I heard the coroner state that Sinn Féin refused to take part in that inquest, but yet it has the brass neck to try to say in the Chamber today that everybody else was wrong and it was right.”
“The Springhill inquest findings are clear: five innocent civilians lost their lives. Everyone in the House should note that. The tragedy facing many families across Northern Ireland is not dissimilar from that faced by the families of Springhill: they lost their loved ones in some of the darkest days of Northern Ireland's Troubles. I can say that without equivocation. I know many families, including some of my wider family members, who feel that loss today. <BR /> <BR />There is an attempt by many to characterise every member of the armed forces who served in Northern Ireland in difficult times as evil, corrupt and barbaric. That could not be further from the truth. So many of them served with distinction and put their life on the line to protect civilians, regardless of their political opinion.”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. She, of all people, will know that the energy context of today is not the same as it was six months ago, never mind a year ago, and that it will perhaps change in the future. She will know my concerns about energy security and, indeed, affordability. Notwithstanding the comments that have been made across the House about fracking — we know that the Bill does much more than address that — why did the Department not consider going forward with option 3, which would have banned fracking but allowed other petroleum exploration, given not just the number of people who supported that in their response to the consultation but the wider energy context that we live in today?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Whilst the Bill does not preclude offshore drilling — it is important to draw that distinction — does he agree that what is needed for an energy-efficient and energy-secure future is a healthy mix of renewable and fossil fuels? Does he also agree that, despite what some in the House have suggested, renewable energy sources, whether wind or solar, do not necessarily mean lower bills for our consumers?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I share many of his concerns, albeit very few licences have ever been granted, and there are very few at present. There is no categorical evidence to suggest that the amount of exploration has proven explicitly that there is no potential source of home-grown energy in the future. <BR /> <BR />I note that most Members' comments today have focused on the fracking aspect of the legislation, and there are legitimate arguments for that. However, the Bill contains a provision for a complete ban on all petroleum exploration. Does the Member agree that, given that the reports suggest that considerable gaps in information remain, perhaps the Minister could have explored option 3, which was to ban the fracking aspect and leave petroleum exploration for the future?”
“It is not progress in 2026 to say that young people should have access to dangerous drugs such as puberty blockers. It is not progress in 2026 to say to the young people of today that there was no alternative to the violence of the past. <BR /> <BR />There is a leadership issue at the heart of Sinn Féin, and the party is very keen to distract from it. When asked whether Mary Lou will continue as leader, Michelle O'Neill was quick to say that the party is full of talent. Where is it? It does not sit in the Assembly. Eulogising the terrorism of yesterday breeds the terrorism of today. We have to be very aware of that.”
“As sure as day follows night, however, the biggest bluff and distraction was put back on the table by Michelle O'Neill when she said that we are to have a border poll by 2030. That is not something new for a Sinn Féin ard-fheis. It is not something new for Sinn Féin Members in the Chamber. In 1974, we were told that it would be the year of victory. Mystic Meg-like Gerry Adams predicted that we would have left the union by 2016. With his crystal ball, he then corrected that to 2024. It is a common tactic: the tactic of distraction. <BR /> <BR />At the weekend, Sinn Féin presented itself as the party of progress. I argue that it is the party of stagnant decay, because, let us face it, it is not progress in 2026 to say that men can be women. It is not progress in 2026 to say that men can partake in women-only sports.”
“It was a clear attempt to cover up the complete disaster that has been caused by the Sinn Féin Ministers who currently occupy office, be that the Minister for Infrastructure, who is overseeing a complete disaster in her Department as a result of the roads nightmare and the blocking of key infrastructure projects such as the A5, the A4 and the A1 because of climate change targets to which her party's Members were co-signatories, or the Minister for the Economy, who is more intent on losing jobs for here than creating jobs. You could not make it up.”
“At the weekend, Sinn Féin, the party of bluff, spin and distraction, held its annual conference in Belfast. Just like a scene from North Korea's Central Committee, the faithful clapped on cue in response to totally unfounded claims.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Hopefully, my question has not been asked. <BR /> <BR />I thank the Minister for making the statement. I would have liked him to make a statement on the issue earlier. The Minister has committed to publishing the review report and the departmental response. Is the Minister prepared to publish the inspection findings report of HSE GB — the Health and Safety Executive?”
“Let us focus on what is in the room, Mr Blair, and the cost of net zero policies. Let us provide transparency so that we allow the public to see the financial impact of decisions that are made in their name. Those policies will cost hundreds of millions of pounds, if not more, yet Members from the parties opposite are prepared to vote against the very basis of that scrutiny; to vote against asking Departments what the costs of those crazy, wacky, unattainable targets have meant for the people of Northern Ireland. They should hang their heads in shame. What are you afraid of? If you want to stand up and say that those policies are not costing but have a benefit, vote for the motion and allow your Departments to come forward with those policies. The public are waiting and will be watching every single vote.”
“<BR /> <BR />The motion is not extreme or unreasonable. It is a simple request that we look properly, across every Department, at the cost of net zero policies.”
“I will in a moment. <BR /> <BR />Policy has to work. It has to be grounded in reality, affordable and fair. My constituents are not choosing between luxuries. They are not choosing between the sports car and the second home. Members, they are choosing between heating and eating. That is the reality of what we live with today, yet the so-called socialists in the Chamber, such as Mr Carroll, have forgotten their roots and that every pound that is added to energy costs, food bills and transport comes out of the pockets of working families. The people of West Belfast will have their say on his policies. Let us get beyond the spin. When we talk about carbon reduction in those policies, action plans and targets, we are talking about increased costs. We punish ourselves whilst the rest of the world carries on.”
“You cannot claim to stand with working families whilst simultaneously supporting policies that drive up the cost of living. John Hume once said, "You can't eat a flag." I would argue that you cannot feed a family with a climate change target. Those policies hit families, farms and front-line workers. We all want clean air, clean land and a better future for our children. That is not in dispute. However, good intentions are not enough.”
“I will in a moment, if I have time. <BR /> <BR />What do carbon taxes and climate change plans mean to the ordinary person? They mean higher heating bills, higher food costs, fewer family farms, more expensive travel and less money at the end of the month. That burden will not be carried by the few, Members. Rather, it will be carried by the many, because, while ordinary people are being asked to cut back and do without, billionaires fly across the world in private jets to climate change summits and others want to launch rockets into the sky. Members, it is not a shared sacrifice. This is a two-tiered policy and the ordinary man and woman are footing the bill. <BR /> <BR />Meanwhile, the SDLP tells us that the UK is not moving fast enough. Those Members call themselves social democrats.”
“If we do not change course, it will become an anchor around the neck of this place's economic prosperity. <BR /> <BR />The Alliance Party speaks of carbon taxes and climate change plans.”
“<BR /> <BR />Mr McAleer comes into the Chamber as if he is the farmer's friend, but he was a co-signatory to the very climate change amendments that have held up the A5 project in the courts. We will therefore take no lectures from Sinn Féin about support for key road infrastructure. The A1 road safety project and the A4 Enniskillen southern bypass project have been halted, and many more projects will be affected, so I ask this again: who are you trying to bluff? Your net zero targets are not abstract. They are being used to stop roads being built. They are delaying critical infrastructure and holding back development. At the same time, what do we see money being spent on? Cycle lanes to nowhere. The reality is that your priorities are being dictated by the very targets that you claim to support, and that is only the beginning.”
“What we are witnessing are uncosted, radical economic experiments dressed up as policy, and that policy is being pushed on people who never asked for it in the first place. It hits families, workers and small businesses. <BR /> <BR />What are the consequences? Let us look at infrastructure, which is something that this country desperately needs. Sinn Féin's Minister for Infrastructure is overseeing a national fiasco in her Department, and that is not even to mention the potholes on our roads. The A5 road project, which is an Executive flagship project, was halted by the courts because of the very amendments on climate change and net zero targets that Sinn Féin backed. Over £100 million of public money was spent on the A5, but not one bit of tar was laid. That is completely scandalous.”
“That is exactly what is happening. We are told that it is necessary and urgent, but let us take a step back and look at the reality. The United Kingdom produces about 1% of global carbon emissions: 1%. Northern Ireland produces 0·04% of global emissions. Let me repeat that figure: 0·04%. Members, however, come to the Chamber and act as if we are the world's thermostat. Major countries such as China, India, Brazil and the USA are laughing at the continued folly of the many parties that are devoid of all common sense when it comes to the realities facing communities every day. Yes, we must care for the earth and are called to do so, but we are also called to care for the people who live on it. Right now, the agenda is failing those people. We cannot have growth without energy. We cannot help families by taking from them.”
“The problem for the parties opposite is simple: they are living in a complete fantasy world. You cannot run a country on targets that have not been properly costed, and you cannot ask people to make sacrifices without being honest about what those sacrifices will mean and, more importantly, what the cost will be. You can snigger all that you like, but the working families in the communities of Northern Ireland who are on the street protesting out of fear for their livelihoods are not sniggering. Rather, they are angry at policies that you continue to prop up.”
“Is it blind allegiance, or is it something else? Perhaps it is a reluctance to admit the scale of the burden that you are placing on working families.”
“I will come back in a moment. Why vote against transparency? Why vote against allowing the public to see clearly and honestly the true cost of policies that will affect every home, farm and business in this country?”
“I will make some progress. <BR /> <BR />I am obviously touching a nerve. The parties opposite have so deeply bought into the net zero agenda that they are no longer willing to even question it, no matter the cost to the people whom they purport to represent. The Alliance Party, the SDLP, Sinn Féin and, sadly — I say it with regret — the Ulster Unionist Party, it appears, are not going to support the motion. Let me ask a simple question: why? Why vote against a motion that asks your Departments to carry out a cost-benefit analysis and remove harmful departmental plans?”
“I had hoped that we would have a sensible debate today, a moment of reflection on past net zero targets that are, frankly, crippling infrastructure, our businesses and our households. It appears that that hope was misplaced. Outside the Building, farmers, truckers and key workers are protesting — they are up in arms — about the cost of fuel and energy and a system that is designed against their interests, but there was not one mention of that from the major parties opposite. Why?”
“On a point of correction, it is £3 million.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Let us also talk about the £100 million-plus that has been spent on the A5 road without one single piece of tar being laid.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Does she agree that that is the very point? Due to the legislation, the Department for Infrastructure is unable to move money to where the real need is, which is rural roads that are crumbling at the minute and roads that are totally impassable for civilians and vehicles?”
“I thank the Member. I will assess that motion when it comes, and, if I feel that it is in the best interests of the Northern Ireland public, I will certainly support it. In that vein, the Member has outlined many aspects of today's motion that he agrees with and some that he does not: will the Ulster Unionists support today's motion?”
“I know that Mr Kearney is giving his own version of history, but perhaps he could be accurate and say that it is his party's commitment to climate change targets that is essentially driving industry to a halt in Northern Ireland.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Does he acknowledge that the then Minister, Edwin Poots, went on to say:”
“Minister, with respect, you have not answered the question, so I can only conclude that you have not met prison officers and senior prison officials following that attack. That attack took place when, according to the staff amongst whom you say the culture is well, the prison was in chaos and prison officers feared for their safety. You have not addressed that point. Minister, did you meet senior prison officials following that rampage, which has been reported in today's newspaper? Or, do you think that it is fake news?”
“Staff say that the prison is descending into chaos. They talk about almost a dozen alarms that were sounded in just one day. <BR /> <BR />Minister, that is on your watch. Your prison officer staff are living in fear. Inmates are going on the rampage. Will you please tell us this: is there a drug problem in our prisons? Have they turned into drug dens? That headline and those accounts suggest that we have serious problems.”