Matthew O'Toole
South Belfast · Social Democratic and Labour Party · Northern Ireland
“I appreciate my colleague's giving way. Unfortunately, I was not here for all of the Minister's remarks — like her, I have been in the Chamber for a lot of today, so I had to pop out and attend to some other business. I presume that the Member will agree that these provisions could be more properly included in the Sentencing Bill.”
“Clearly, however, the regulatory and enforcement regime for all those watercourses and marine environments is way out of date ecologically and, indeed, economically.”
“We learned about the antics of Jeffrey Donaldson that were not criminal — so far — only after his conviction. Reporters have been able to go and find that information and people have been able to speak — felt able to speak — because Mr Donaldson has been sent to prison, convicted of appalling crimes, and is therefore less likely to seek r…”
“We are pleased, in broad terms, to support it at Second Stage. We welcome the move towards an approach to fisheries management that is ecosystem-based rather than narrowly species-based.”
“We were robust in opposing those who were not willing to deal with the nutrients action plan, for example, which should have been a core part of dealing with Lough Neagh. Of course, the farming industry needed to be engaged, and the Minister has been doing a lot of that work recently.”
“On a point of order, Mr Speaker. In just a few hours' time, the House will go into recess for more than two months. There are two outstanding and grave matters that the public in Northern Ireland want us to deal with, but we are walking away, so I want your advice on Standing Orders.”
The complete record
Every one of 5,909 lines we hold for Matthew O'Toole, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 119.
“I appreciate the strength of the Member's words on the Lloyd-Lavery case. Certainly, what happened in that case was that the reference, in a sense, compounded the hurt of the victims and their families because, whatever the outcome of the judge's considerations, it trivialised and dismissed the real pain that they had suffered.”
“I presume that it is something that we could look at in the Sentencing Bill.”
“I appreciate my colleague's giving way. Unfortunately, I was not here for all of the Minister's remarks — like her, I have been in the Chamber for a lot of today, so I had to pop out and attend to some other business. I presume that the Member will agree that these provisions could be more properly included in the Sentencing Bill. He talked about the plight of victims in serious sex offences. He will be aware of the reporting around the recent conviction and sentencing of a Mr William Lloyd-Lavery, formerly employed in this Building. In that instance, references were shared that were really very insensitive and, subsequently, comments were made by individuals in relation to that. Those kinds of sentencing remarks add to the hurt of victims of crime, particularly sexual crime. Is that something that you think should be looked at?”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. It is a bit cheeky of me to ask him this question, because he may not have the information. His officials are here, but presumably they cannot participate in the debate. Does the Minister know whether we have more fish kills per hectare or per watercourse than other parts of these islands? I imagine that we do.”
“I look forward to engaging in more detail, but, at this stage, we are happy to support the Bill and look forward to discussing it in Committee and beyond.”
“We are pleased, in broad terms, to support it at Second Stage. We welcome the move towards an approach to fisheries management that is ecosystem-based rather than narrowly species-based. We would like to hear from the Minister on whether he sees commonality with other areas of environmental and conservation policy in which the need to recover our, frankly, devastated ecosystem can be balanced with the legitimate economic and community interests of those who earn their living from land, sea and inland waterways. We are keen to support the Bill at Second Stage. We are actively looking at where we can improve and enhance it through amendment. My colleague will scrutinise the Bill at Committee Stage, which will, we hope, proceed without undue delay so that the legislation can be passed before the end of the mandate.”
“We were robust in opposing those who were not willing to deal with the nutrients action plan, for example, which should have been a core part of dealing with Lough Neagh. Of course, the farming industry needed to be engaged, and the Minister has been doing a lot of that work recently. However, we welcome the Bill as representing progress in that area. It would be helpful if the Minister were specific in his winding-up speech about the ways in which the Bill's provisions will help the delivery of the outcomes in the Lough Neagh action plan, such as they are. We have been somewhat critical about the relative absence of specific outcomes versus rather more general enabling actions or aspirations. <BR /> <BR />In general, we welcome the improved enforcement and regulatory mechanisms in the Bill.”
“We do not make payments to fisheries or to people engaged in related activity in the same way as we do to farmers, but there is, I think, an association by making a stronger link between the regulatory and policy regime and a broader set of ecological and environmental aims rather than a narrow output. If the Minister were able to state whether there is, in his view, policy consistency with the Farming with Nature agenda, such as it is, I would be keen to hear that. <BR /> <BR />The Bill will not solve the environmental challenges that exist in Lough Neagh — far from it. As the Opposition, we have been robust in outlining the ways in which the Executive have not gone far enough or fast enough in addressing that crisis.”
“The Bill will also modernise the licensing system, as has been said, by replacing the existing fish culture licence with a broader aquaculture licence, that will expand the licensing framework to cover newer forms of aquaculture, including activities such as seaweed farming, while providing flexibility for future developments. Although the Committee will study the Bill in detail, I would like to know whether the Minister thinks that that is part of the broader Farming with Nature agenda, which is much further advanced across the water, where there is a different type of regime. I am not comparing the two.”
“I would like to hear from the Minister how the Bill will specifically improve enforcement and, frankly, increase the punishment for those who cause things such as fish kills.”
“I am pleased to see that this Bill is intended to tighten up the regulatory space in order to protect sensitive species, improve biodiversity and bring greater health to marine and inland water ecosystems. <BR /> <BR />The Bill does a range of things by way of enforcement. It provides fisheries officers with more modern enforcement powers. It introduces fixed penalty notices for appropriate fisheries and water environment offences. It increases penalties for the most serious offences and allows enforcement action to be more proportionate to the nature of the offence. All too often during the — amazingly — six and a half years for which I have been an MLA, I have heard questions to the AERA Minister about one fish kill or another. It often seems that those things happen with impunity.”
“Clearly, however, the regulatory and enforcement regime for all those watercourses and marine environments is way out of date ecologically and, indeed, economically. As Mr Butler said, it is a false dichotomy to talk about choosing between sustainability and the economic side of things, meaning turning the environmental against the economic. If you devastate and are unable to replenish stocks, and if the ecology declines to such an extent that the stock cannot be sustainably farmed and fished, you do not have an industry by which those communities can sustain themselves. The dichotomy of turning one against the other is false. It is also true to say, frankly, that we are one of the most nature-depleted regions in the world. There is an issue there that pertains to the marine water environments too; it is not just on land.”
“Fisheries are not just how people earn their living in those towns and villages; they are core to the DNA of those places. They are where they get their sense of identity from, in a sense, so it is hugely important that we support them.”
“<BR /> <BR />More generally, we also have challenges that have been created around fisheries stocks in our coastal waters, which present challenges for our coastal communities who want to be able to fish to earn a living, generate income and sustain jobs in those communities. I grew up close to Ardglass and went to school with many kids of people who were employed in the fishing trade in Ardglass. Indeed, when I was about 10 years old, I made a documentary with BBC Northern Ireland about the Ardglass fishing industry. I wonder whether anyone can find it; it was one of the first times that I engaged in being on camera. I know all about it: we have lots of family friends who are engaged in the fishing trade in that part of the world. Members mentioned Portavogie and Kilkeel.”
“Lough Neagh eel and pollan stocks are both depleted and depleting, in part as a result of the ecological crisis. The Minister has had to impose fairly swingeing restrictions on the Lough Neagh eel fishermen, who have been dealing with a crisis in the lough that, in most cases, they have been fishing for generations. That is part of the broader collapse of the Lough Neagh ecosystem. The sci-fi images that we have seen are connected to historical intensification. The soil around Lough Neagh is also connected to long-running problems with Northern Ireland Water. We also have a looming crisis in Belfast lough, where similar but distinct issues are arising.”
“I am pleased to speak on behalf of the Opposition on the Second Stage of the Fisheries, Aquaculture and Water Environment Bill, which we will support as it proceeds to Committee Stage. It is important to say that this Bill marks an important modernisation of powers, but it comes in a context that is important to acknowledge. That context is multifarious and touches on all the types of waterways and marine and inland water environments that we are debating in this Bill. <BR /> <BR />We obviously have the crisis in Lough Neagh. It is a multifold crisis in terms of ecological devastation that has an onward impact on the treasured stocks of Lough Neagh eel and pollan that are an extraordinarily precious part of our culture, our food offering and the produce from this part of the world.”
“What mechanisms are there under Standing Orders for MLAs to recall the Assembly over the summer, if necessary, in order to ask further questions, to pass a Budget Bill and, if necessary, to express our confidence or otherwise in the Speaker or Ministers?”
“On a point of order, Mr Speaker. In just a few hours' time, the House will go into recess for more than two months. There are two outstanding and grave matters that the public in Northern Ireland want us to deal with, but we are walking away, so I want your advice on Standing Orders. Number one, we do not have a Budget, which will threaten public service delivery over the summer, creating chaos. We may have to come back to pass a Budget Bill. Number two, Mr Speaker, the revelations about Jeffrey Donaldson have thrown this institution, including, it has to be said, your speakership, into grave doubt. I attempted today to ask a question for urgent oral answer of the First Minister and the deputy First Minister — particularly the deputy First Minister — which, I am sorry to say, was rejected.”
“— and what that means for public life in Northern Ireland.”
“People have not properly confronted it, in part because some in the Chamber benefit from the protections that it offers. Others in the Chamber do not and have been subject to defamation actions. Of course there should be protections for people from false and defamatory claims, but, in this region, we have a particular problem. I am writing to the Finance Minister and the Justice Minister, both of whom have a policy interest, to get to the heart of whether our defamation regime prevents reporting on vital matters. I think that it does — in fact, I am sure that it does. One of the many things that has to come from the Donaldson scandal is a proper examination of our libel regime, the ways in which powerful people use it to protect themselves from scrutiny —”
“He tried to intimidate the people running that website using lawyers. That kind of intimidation happens in Northern Ireland every day, because our defamation regime encourages the chilling of free, democratic debate. It is used not just by the DUP but by Sinn Féin in order to silence debate. I have a real worry that that prevented the reporting of Donaldson's deeply, grotesquely hypocritical behaviour and his other types of behaviour that may have crossed the criminal threshold. We do not know that yet, but we may find out more, because journalists, free from libelling that gentleman because of the predicament that he is in, are now able to report on it properly. <BR /> <BR />The crisis has been going on for years — in fact, decades.”
“We learned about the antics of Jeffrey Donaldson that were not criminal — so far — only after his conviction. Reporters have been able to go and find that information and people have been able to speak — felt able to speak — because Mr Donaldson has been sent to prison, convicted of appalling crimes, and is therefore less likely to seek recourse through litigation. Otherwise, people probably would not have spoken and the media probably would have been chilled from reporting on it. That is a crisis throughout public life here. Members of the Chamber have used the defamation regime to shut down debate. Institutions use it to shut down scrutiny. In the past, Jeffrey Donaldson used it to shut down a not-for-profit website, openDemocracy, that was reporting on his shady links to the funding of a wrap-around pro-Brexit ad.”
“There are profound questions to answer for institutions, most particularly for the DUP and for individuals associated with the DUP. We talked about some of them yesterday. We need to understand more from the DUP leader about what the supposedly independent review will mean. However, we need to address a specific context in Northern Ireland, which is our defamation regime.”
“In the few minutes that I have before the end of term, I would want to be talking about the chaos that has been created by the absence of an Executive Budget and expressing hope that the Executive and the UK Government will finally get on with agreeing a Budget in order to prevent the collapse of more public services in Northern Ireland. It is shameful that we are in that situation, but, since I have only a few minutes, I must talk about an urgent matter that relates to the revelations over the past week involving Jeffrey Donaldson.”
“<BR /> <BR />The second one is about rules 12 and 13. I think that I can talk about this now. I was investigated for alleged breaches — they were found to be true, but I think that they were slightly absurd — by disclosing the fact that I had submitted a complaint about someone else over standards. Will repealing Standing Order 70 change how the Committee on Standards and Privileges approaches those rules or other rules on such things? It would be helpful to get clarity from the Chairperson on those two points.”
“I appreciate the Chairperson's giving way. I am relatively new to this, but I was briefly a member of the Committee on Procedures. I have a bit of an interest in a couple of matters, so I want to get clarity, for the record, on what is meant by the motion. <BR /> <BR />By repealing Standing Order 70, we are not in any way affecting our privilege to speak. It is worth reminding Members that we do not have indemnification, unlike MPs, when we speak outside the Chamber. Our privilege is caveated and is not as absolute as that for MPs, and we do not have indemnification when we speak outside the Chamber. We also have a very aggressive defamation regime. Members should be aware of that when discussing the motion. For clarity, however, the repeal does not affect our privileges, constricted and mitigated as they are. That is the first question.”
“On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. I hate to be the Chair of the Finance Committee, but, by my count, we are not quite quorate. I do not know whether that calls into question legally anything that we do now.”
“As a Member said, the statement mentions greenways. It also mentions a waterway. One waterway — or kind of a waterway — in my constituency is Knockbracken reservoir. It is better known these days as Let's Go Hydro. I believe that the Minister visited Carryduff and that part of the world recently. A long-overdue addition to Carryduff and that part of BT8 is a Carryduff greenway. Do you plan to release funds for a Carryduff greenway? What progress has been made? The people in that area have been crying out for developments on a Carryduff greenway for far too long.”
“Minister, the Larne West distributor was supposed to have been delivered by developers 25 or 30 years ago. It is a developer-led project. As I understand it — I do not represent Larne — it involves a couple of hundred metres of unbuilt road. Does the farcical situation of that unbuilt road in Larne not give the lie to your somewhat preposterous notion that developers will meet the £2 billon funding shortfall facing Northern Ireland Water? If they cannot build a couple of hundred metres of road in Larne, how will they fund our waste water infrastructure, which is an issue that is holding back our economy?”
“You and I do not want it to be there in the first place, but do you agree that, while it is, it needs to be as open and smooth as possible?”
“Minister, I welcome the statement. I hope that you can take advantage of the Irish presidency and use your influence to push the need for a successor programme. My question is specifically about an issue that affects the border, which was asked about before. Clearly, the programme aims, in particular, to help border regions on both sides of the border that have dealt with the legacy of partition, division and all those things. A concerning poll came out this weekend, and there has been lots of concerning chatter about people reimposing a hard border on people, as it were, on the island of Ireland. I assume that you will want to join me in saying clearly that the worst possible thing for the communities that benefit from PEACE PLUS funding is any suggestion of hardening that border; it needs to be kept open, free and smooth.”
“Minister, I welcome the business growth accelerator proposal, but it is a proposal that will be consulted on, and I have genuinely lost count of the number of proposals and consultations we have had on ratings policy. We have had countless consultations on changes to rating — you mentioned vacant properties, and we have had them on non-domestic vacant relief and the maximum cap for domestic properties — but have had no policy change, so "accelerator" is a bit of a misnomer because nothing has moved more slowly than change on rates. Will there be a single change to the rates system before the end of the mandate?”
“People will question whether it is, as it were, good enough simply to have your assurance. That is not to impugn you; it is simply to say that we will want more clarity. Will there be any other process, whether it is a written statement provided to the Assembly Library for Members to study or any other formal process via an Assembly Committee or the Assembly Commission? Can you offer us the opportunity to satisfy ourselves around your actions in 2021, not to impugn you but merely so that we can all have confidence and, much more important, that the public of Northern Ireland can have confidence?”
“On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I do not think that anybody is conflating the actions of Jeffrey Donaldson with your response, and I do not think that that is what is at issue here. The question is of providing confidence because, under Standing Orders, we have no other means of holding the Speaker's Office to account. The Speaker's Office is the symbolic head of this institution. We all elect the Speaker, so we need to understand and we all need to have confidence. <BR /> <BR />If you are saying that the review by the Clerk pertains only to the time when Mr Donaldson was a Member of this Chamber, are there any other means of clarifying the processes that were followed in 2021 in that brief period when you were leader? We understand that certain processes were followed.”
“On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I appreciate the Speaker's allowing these points of order to provide clarity. So that we can understand, I ask whether the Chief Executive's review will be of the circumstances of your involvement in the matter in 2021; broader issues surrounding Donaldson's time as an MLA and junior Minister; or both. I think that we now have clarity about the fact that both the terms of reference and the report will be published, but will you clarify precisely what the Chief Executive is being asked to review and publish on?”
“On a point of order, Mr Speaker. These are clearly matters of the gravest importance. I welcome the fact that you have given us some indication and clarification today. I need to ask you these questions, because, under Standing Orders, there is no formal accountability provision for your office: are you confident that no safeguarding procedure was engaged? Have you taken advice from any statutory agency or from the PSNI on that? Moreover, will you provide a detailed written response either to the Assembly Commission or in some other form, including making copies available via the Assembly Library? It would be helpful to have detailed clarity on those points.”
“On a point of order, Mr Speaker. You will be aware that, over the past few days, revelations have been published by BBC's 'Spotlight' that touch on grave matters, including some that concern you. Standing Order —.”
“— what actions have and have not been taken.”
“One such question concerns the defamation regime in Northern Ireland. We need to understand whether it serves to protect powerful people here. At the heart of this, however, is the fact that the DUP needs to reflect on what has happened —”
“To be clear, I do not believe that public figures should have their lawful private lives policed when it comes to sexual conduct or alcohol intake. I am not a moralist. I do not seek to sit in judgement of others or to constrain others' private lives. The DUP does, however, and has done for all its existence. It is of no consequence to me what people do privately, so long as it is legal and consensual, but it becomes a matter of public interest when a party political leader whose party is blocking basic rights for gay people and blocking relationships and sexuality education (RSE) for young people is engaged in grotesquely hypocritical conduct. <BR /> <BR />There is a whole range of questions that need to be answered. We have scarcely time to touch on them in the short time available today.”
“The convention in the House is that we do not challenge the Chair, but such conventions pale in comparison to questions of safeguarding, so I ask for clarity on what processes were followed, and, yes, that goes for the DUP more broadly. An internal review will not be enough, given the gravity of the issues. We also need to understand whether any concerns were raised about Jeffrey Donaldson when he was an MLA, including when he served as a junior Minister with specific responsibilities for young people. The public must have confidence that those of us who wield power are following safeguarding processes. <BR /> <BR />Distinct from specific questions of safeguarding is the issue of divergence between the public and the private. That also touches on public confidence.”
“The allegations were serious enough for the former MP and MLA for North Antrim to describe that young woman as a "victim" of Donaldson and pass her complaint on to the then party leader, who is now the Speaker. We are told that that woman's wishes were followed up on but not whether a safeguarding policy was followed or whether the matter was referred to the police. Given, as I said, that the party leader in question is now the Speaker of the Assembly, it is of the utmost importance that urgent and specific clarity be brought to the matter. What was the nature of the complaint? What safeguarding policy was followed? What action was taken?”
“Jeffrey Donaldson is an abuser, and he — no one else — is responsible for his abuse. His victims have experienced pain that few of us can imagine and shown courage that few of us would be capable of. Although Donaldson alone is culpable for his actions, all institutions are responsible for protecting vulnerable people. Abusers can manipulate in any organisation. That is why safeguarding policies exist and need to be followed, and it is why further revelations about Donaldson's actions must be explained and investigated. <BR /> <BR />'Spotlight' and the 'Belfast Telegraph' have reported that a young woman complained of being exploited by the former DUP leader.”
“I thank my colleague for that answer. As he said, it is extremely important that, as a facilitator of democratic debate and government here and as an employer, the Assembly is an exemplar. What are the formal or informal means whereby information or best practice, as has been gathered by, for example, the Youth Assembly, the Women's Parliament or the Women's Caucus, can be filtered back to, for example, the Executive Office-led working group on violence against women and girls, in order to ensure that, as a corporate body, we are contributing to that work?”
“I am sure that we could do that in a way that is sensitive and inclusive, but it is also about earning us some revenue. It could also include lots of local crafts. At the minute, I think that we are missing a trick and that, frankly, we could earn some extra revenue.”
“I have a very specific question to ask, and I genuinely ask it in good faith. The Speaker's Corner shop is staffed by wonderful Assembly staff, but, to be perfectly honest, the shop's offering is not very good. If one goes to other public facilities, such as the Ulster Museum, which is in my constituency, or, indeed, to other Parliaments and Assemblies, one sees that they offer much more interesting stuff for sale. The shop generates some revenue for the Assembly. Lots of people who visit this place are probably interested in politics and in our peace process. Will the Assembly Commission therefore look at improving the quality of the shop's offering? That might include stocking books about the peace process, Irish history — our complicated history — and other forms of memorabilia.”
“Minister, we are not on holiday yet, but you appear to be in almost horizontal mode when it comes to the crisis. I am aware of public services that will be at risk this summer, including councils, community and voluntary sector organisations that operate holiday hunger services, community integration services and social supermarkets. A vast number of public services are at risk, and some will not run at all. You have just, at 2.30 pm, published a document in the absence of the June monitoring round, which makes it clear that we are not able to draw down on Westminster's Main Estimates funding. Will you accept that there are public services in crisis now that cannot proceed this summer to help vulnerable people because you and the Executive have not passed a Budget? Please, be honest about that.”
“That is not likely, but the best choice for Northern Ireland is to rebuild that common purpose and build a new Ireland back inside the European Union. It is why I am in politics; it is an inspiring vision 10 years on, and I look forward to talking to people about it.”
“<BR /> <BR />Flawed, bureaucratic, legalistic and frustrating as the European Union often is, that extraordinary peace project helped to underpin stability and trust on these islands, and it was lost on 23 June 2016, along with lots of other things, such as a sense that we could work together, rather than operate a zero-sum game of the UK versus Ireland. Gone are the hundreds of billions of pounds in tax revenue and economic growth, and we feel that every day in the squeeze on our public services. Gone is any sense of stability, as we see, again, a new Prime Minister in the UK. <BR /> <BR />We have a choice to make in the future. The SDLP will have a conference on Thursday about change on these islands. The SDLP believes that the best future for the UK would be to rejoin the European Union.”
“I was working as a UK civil servant, and, in a sense, I represented the complexity of relationships that had been created after 1998 and were underpinned by the common British and Irish membership of the European Union: the idea that we could overcome our tragic, awful history through interdependence and a common purpose through the extraordinary project that was and is the European Union, which provided and underpinned peace on the island of Ireland, although, amazingly, many are still in denial about that. It was the local manifestation of what our former leader John Hume rightly called the greatest peace project in human history: the European Union.”