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“Clearly, however, the regulatory and enforcement regime for all those watercourses and marine environments is way out of date ecologically and, indeed, economically.”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 12 of 119.
“Tuts are coming from the Chamber, but that is the man whose reckless and illegal bombardment has driven up energy prices and created the problem that we have today. <BR /> <BR />It is true that some of the measures would need to be paid for in part by the British Government, who, yes, need to engage, but what have we seen from the DUP and Sinn Féin, the two Executive parties, collectively today? We have seen theatrical Punch and Judy politics, deflection from their responsibilities and a refusal to take responsibility.”
“There is not much for me to add after my colleague Daniel McCrossan was clear about the Executive's failure to take responsibility on behalf of the Northern Ireland public. Let me be clear, as Daniel McCrossan and Mark H Durkan were, about the Executive's failure to take responsibility for telling the Northern Ireland public how they want to support them. Let me also say that, number one, this is Donald Trump's war. The spike in energy prices is a result of Donald Trump's insane and reckless bombardment of Iran. The Members opposite were not just OK with that but cheered it in the Chamber a few weeks ago. Some of them, including the mover of the Matter of the Day, Mr Buckley, then went and got photographs taken with Mr Trump in the White House.”
“We still have a year left. We have to improve public services. We have to finally pass some legislation. We have to prove to the public, including the families who are here today, that this place can deliver something for them. We genuinely cannot go on like this.”
“You raised it, but it was not clarified. Instead, it is much better to come to the Chamber and have the panto villain Paul Givan to shout at. Your two parties are supposed to serve the public here. Certain parties want Paul Givan to be a panto villain. He, at times, is all too willing to play that part. It genuinely fails the public, guys.”
“I will not. I do not have time, I am afraid. I take interventions all the time, Deirdre. I just do not have time now because I have such limited time to make a winding-up speech.”
“They want better outcomes for themselves and their families, and this spectacle has been depressing. <BR /> <BR />Our amendment clearly points out that the minutes of the Education Authority meeting on 26 February show that the issue was discussed by the board of the Education Authority. We do not sit on that board. That is not us shirking our responsibility. If we did sit on that board, I would ask our representative why they had not briefed us and pushed us to ask questions about it. However, all the Executive parties are represented on that board, so there is a legitimate question. I think that it was Nuala McAllister who said earlier that nothing will ever improve without accountability. That is our job as the Opposition, and we do it without fear or favour. Why did Sinn Féin, Alliance, the Ulster Unionists and the DUP not clarify —?”
“<BR /> <BR />I have not heard anybody today explain to me why, at that point, he did not say, "Minister Nesbitt, we are colleagues in the Executive. Can we sort this out so that families are not placed in this position?", or, indeed, why their permanent secretaries or even much more junior officials did not have that conversation weeks, if not months, beforehand. <BR /> <BR />That is a failure of collective Government here. I am afraid that we have seen more of that failure today from parties in the Executive, including Sinn Féin and Alliance — I respect the fact that they are standing up and speaking for special educational needs families — but this is an Executive failure writ large. The public want a Government who deliver for them writ large. They do not simply want point-scoring for its own sake.”
“Also, as of midnight tonight, community and voluntary services will lose funding that is critical to their support for communities. Instead, the largest parties that comprise the Executive have come to the Chamber and gleefully torn lumps out of one another. <BR /> <BR />On the specifics of the decision, or lack of decision, and lack of clarity given by the Education Minister and Health Minister, I appreciate the Education Minister's clarifying some points. However, clearly, it was an immense failure by him and his Department and, indeed, the Health Minister to clarify it earlier. In response to an intervention, he confirmed to me that he knew before 26 March. Indeed, he knew weeks before then that the decision was about to be made. Before the EA made the announcement on 26 March that the summer schemes would be discontinued, he knew.”
“<BR /> <BR />Clearly, in the past week, the Executive collectively — I will come back to that point — have failed those families. We recognise and welcome the fact that a U-turn has been announced, but we should never have got to that point in the first place, and we should not be here. <BR /> <BR />What is the purpose of the Government? It is, ultimately, for those who are elected to office to work together to serve the public. What we have witnessed today is a spectacle of different political parties, which are supposed to work together for the common good, tearing lumps out of one another. It is shambolic, but it is also shameful, given the state not only of support services for special educational needs families but of our public services more generally and the fact that we have not yet agreed a multi-year Budget.”
“<BR /> <BR />First, I want to say this to the families who are in the Chamber, to anybody who watches the coverage of this and to all families who deal with additional needs and the complexities and challenges that doing so creates in their lives: I am deeply sorry that you had to endure the utterly unacceptable farce that happened last week. It caused additional stress to you and to the lives of your families, which are so stressful in the first place, and involve, as was said eloquently by Cheryl Brownlee, immense additional stress and burden that those of us who do not have that burden do not really understand, frankly, but it is our job as legislators and public officials to do everything that we can to support you.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have five minutes, I believe. Clearly, we should not be here, not because we are in recess but because we should not have to recall an Assembly to debate something that should have been clarified weeks, if not months, ago and dealt with in private by bureaucrats or Ministers. Having to recall an Assembly to bring special educational needs families, who have better things to be doing, to the Chamber to watch the spectacle that we have seen today is a profound failure of our politics.”
“I appreciate the Minister's giving way. I want to check a point of information. He mentioned the operational nature of the decision that was made by the EA — it announced that on 26 March. After that, we had the public reaction and the discussion between Health and the EA. Was he informed by the EA before 26 March that summer schemes would be discontinued? It would be helpful to have that point of information.”
“Thank you very much. I am often late. I appreciate the Minister setting out some of those financial issues. Given that the Executive will have been mindful of that, can you confirm this: did any Executive Minister dissent from or challenge your introduction of the Bill a number of weeks ago, if it was discussed at the Executive?”
“If you are getting on for three quarters of a decade, and counting, before implementing it, the public will want to know how much has been spent on implementing it, but, at the same time, not delivering it. That is all that the amendment does: it provides an important piece of accountability. We are pleased to move the amendment. That is what opposition and accountability means, and we are proud to be able to do that job on behalf of the public.”
“The very first thing that you did when you came back was to delay its implementation, and you are now delaying it again.”
“I am grateful for that clarification. I would never be so bold as to assume powers that I do not have. I have to work very hard as leader of the Opposition, as does Colin McGrath and the entire SDLP team. We are the official Opposition, and we have a job to do. We are not going to be dissuaded or discouraged from doing that, despite the fact that other Members do not like it. That is grand, however. We tabled an amendment, which Colin moved. The amendment is about accountability. The public will see that there will be some accountability for the costs that have been incurred. This goes to the heart of the amendment, so let us be honest: the very last thing that you did before the election was to make a promise to the people. You then campaigned on it.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, the purpose of the single amendment that we tabled is to establish the costs of delaying the Bill. That is what an Opposition should be doing. Otherwise, the Bill would have just gone through Consideration Stage, as the first Bill did in 2022 and, I believe, the second Bill did, without a Division. The public, who were promised free parking, would wonder, "What the hell's happening here? What are these people doing? They make promises that they then don't keep". At the very least, we can explain to them the cost of not keeping those promises and how much has been spent on implementation that has not been followed through on. <BR /> <BR />I will give way to Mr McGuigan, because I promised him that I would.”
“I will in a second. <BR /> <BR />I presume, and the Health Minister can correct me about this, that the First Minister and the Minister of Finance agreed to the legislation at the Executive. They certainly did not raise any objection to its introduction. <BR /> <BR />I will take interventions, first from Mr Donnelly and then from Mr McGuigan.”
“I will in a second. <BR /> <BR />I am not sure that Mr McGuigan's party was going to oppose the delay until we forced a Division. I presume, and the Minister of Health can correct me if I am wrong about this —.”
“The very first thing that we did when we returned was to delay the Act's implementation, and we are now delaying its implementation again. People will question the Bill, and they are entitled to do so. It is legitimate to say, as Mr McGuigan did, that people, particularly hospital staff, are hard-pressed, so, although there will be debate about the targeting in the initial Bill, there will also be debate about how we help hard-pressed healthcare staff. <BR /> <BR />I take issue with some of what Mr McGuigan said, however. He —.”
“I will speak briefly in support of my colleague Colin McGrath's amendment to the Hospital Parking Charges Bill. At Second Stage, we indicated our frustration by forcing a Division. It is important that we, as the Opposition, be robust in holding to account the Executive, and, indeed, the Assembly, for the promises that we make to the public and then fail to keep. Let me be absolutely clear: the final Bill that the Assembly passed in 2022 was the Hospital Parking Charges Bill. We told hard-pressed staff, who were, and are still, facing enormous inflationary pressures and who were suffering and had to threaten strike action repeatedly in order to get fair pay settlements that we were taking action to address the cost of parking for them.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Bill also streamlines a range of processes for insolvency practitioners, allowing them to take certain actions, such as recovering assets, without the need to get repeated permission from courts or Departments to do so. We are also pleased to see that the Bill strengthens accountability for company directors. In its totality, it is a practical and sensible Bill, albeit it is legislation that is largely rolling over reforms that have already been introduced in Britain. We are pleased to see the Bill get its Final Stage today.”
“Fundamentally, the Bill is about making insolvency processes more efficient, more accessible and more responsive to the needs of those affected, be they creditors, directors of companies, insolvency practitioners or members of the public. As has been said, one of the most practical reforms that the Bill makes is to shift away from the default use of physical meetings towards a greater use of remote meetings. The Bill allows creditors and shareholders to participate through virtual meetings or correspondence, which is obviously a sensible way in which to do business in the 21st century. One hopes that it will have other positive ancillary benefits. For small businesses and individual creditors, that is a particularly welcome change, because their diaries are often burdened as a result of running a small business and managing other issues.”
“I will briefly commend the passage of the Bill on behalf of the Opposition. It brings forward a series of technical amendments, which, as the Committee Chair said, are largely designed to bring Northern Ireland into line with other parts of the UK. There are some local specifics in the Bill, which have been debated at length in plenary sessions and in the Committee.”
“Since you lauded the access that you had in Washington, did you or any of your colleagues raise with President Donald Trump the consequences for your constituents and the people whom you serve as Communities Minister — the vulnerable, the elderly and people in fuel poverty — as a result of the impact of the war that he has started in Iran? Did you use your access to raise that vital subject?”
“Minister, I agree with you that those links are good for tourism. They have been great for your tourism, because you have had literally thousands of pounds worth of free holidays on this subject. Minister, I have said consistently to you in the Chamber that I support celebrating the role of Ulster-Scots and Scots-Irish people in America. However, you have undermined that case today by coming here to troll and invite a reaction. You did that deliberately, and that is clear from your reactions and those of your colleagues. <BR /> <BR />I will ask you a specific question.”
“Minister, it is genuinely shocking to see the DUP's deflecting attention away from its brazen and shameless blocking of the proposal. Truly, the party of Paisley has become the party of Farage, putting particularly vulnerable and alcohol-dependent people's lives at risk. Minister, have you exhausted all the possibilities of clearing the proposal through the Executive? Specifically, have you used the so-called three-Minister rule in order to force it on to the agenda, or has it been on the agenda and then been blocked by the DUP? I understand that there are limitations on what you can say, but it would be helpful if you could indicate whether all options have been exhausted.”
“Sinn Féin says that it wants to deliver for the people of the North, but, whether it is on the A5, Casement Park or the simple need to invest in our water system in order to build homes, it is failing the people here.”
“<BR /> <BR />The statement also references British austerity, which has been a real thing over the past decade and a half. The Executive have faced a squeeze on the block grant, but it was not British austerity that produced the risible policy that the Minister outlined last week. No wonder she did not come to the Chamber and tell the people and MLAs about it, because it is a joke. It will not help to build a single home, unless there are developers and housing associations that are going to rush out and tell us that they are about to unlock thousands of homes, but I have not heard that yet. It is, frankly, a sign of an Executive who are not delivering for the people.”
“After a 14-week consultation and lots of big promises, and after dismissing Members from other parties in the Chamber who asked the Infrastructure Minister and her colleague the Finance Minister what was being done about NI Water, we have a written ministerial statement, which was snuck out under embargo — not a word to the Chamber and no opportunity for Members to ask questions — on a voluntary contribution system. <BR /> <BR />The statement is at pains to say that no developer, no matter how profitable, will be compelled to make a contribution to the waste water system, so it is a glorified tip jar. You may as well stick a charity box there and say, "Grand, if you want to". I do not know whether it takes contactless or cash only payments, but it is a joke, I am afraid. It is risible.”
“We also know that it is preventing houses, including social and affordable homes, from being built for our people. We know that it is holding back economic development. It is preventing not just big factories and shopping developments but cafés in my constituency — places that sell cups of tea and tray bakes — from opening. It is a disaster. It is one of the single biggest things that is holding this society back. It is keeping people on their mum's sofa. It is stopping social homes being built. It is stopping economic development. <BR /> <BR />The Infrastructure Minister and her party told us that one of the big solutions was that developer contributions would help to unlock development and to tackle our waste water crisis.”
“I will do something for the first time today: talk about a written ministerial statement. The written ministerial statement on the developer levy was published by the Infrastructure Minister last Thursday. It was released under embargo on Wednesday — I am not sure why the embargo existed, by the way — and released formally on Thursday. It was not brought to the House for debate, which, frankly, is no surprise, because one of the first questions that a Member might have reasonably asked is, "What's the point of the policy?", given that it is unclear whether it will contribute to the building of a single home in Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />We know that we have a crisis in our waste water infrastructure system. We know that the crisis is contributing to the environmental catastrophe at Lough Neagh and elsewhere.”
“I will be brief. I appreciate the Member's giving way. To pick a random example, can the creation of a managing authority for controlled schools be justified?”
“This is a genuine rather than a strictly political question. The Fiscal Council document on the multi-year Budget that came out a few weeks ago had some interesting comparisons. I think that I am right in saying that it says that our Civil Service employment is about 180% of that across the water. Does the Minister have a view on that? I note that we have a higher level of need and greater rurality, but does the Minister think that the sheer scale should be looked at? I am genuinely interested in the answer to that.”
“Do not simply shift blame to others. We support the amendment.”
“What I have said is that those of us who want to build a new future on this island should take responsibility and not simply blame the Brits, who, we know, do not really care about us, and not simply blame the DUP, whose Members are at their work again tonight, as they usually are — yes — brazenly talking about wasteful public spending when their party was responsible for the biggest public spending scandal in the history of devolution. I say this to the Finance Minister: take responsibility. Come forward with a plan to improve public services and reform them.”
“In 'New Decade, New Approach', we agreed to hold a review of arm's-length bodies. In all sorts of ways, we have not had meaningful change. We have had more than half a decade of Sinn Féin Finance Ministers, but we have seen no meaningful step change in fiscal devolution, which was touched on, or in public service transformation. <BR /> <BR />The other day, the Minister referred to shroud-waving in relation to budgetary matters. Despite some of the slurs that he has thrown at me, I have never said that the UK Government fund this place to perfect need. I have never said that.”
“<BR /> <BR />By the way, to come back to Mr Gaston's point, I will come in here and be as robust, ruthless and theatrical as I like, and I do it all the time in opposition. However, constructive and serious opposition is also about being able to offer serious and robust scrutiny, which is what we do in the Chamber and what we will do in the Finance Committee. We will not be supporting the substantive motion, but we will be supporting the Sinn Féin amendment, which is a bit more sensible. However, I also say to the Minister of Finance, whose party moved the amendment, that we need clarity from him. Earlier, his colleague Colm Gildernew mentioned the Minister's great review of arm's-length bodies, which, I think, he said was urgent or key. If it is so key, why has it taken six years?”
“<BR /> <BR />I want to see a target for efficiency savings. I hope that the Finance Minister will be able to tell us more about that. I also want to see a programme of meaningful Civil Service reform that improves and changes how we do government here. The Finance Committee is going to be looking at that; our inquiry starts in two days' time, when we will take our first evidence on that topic. We also need to incentivise public servants to transform the way in which we do government here. Let us be clear: we do waste money when it comes to the duplication of public services, as the Alliance Party has raised before. I hope that one or both of the amendments is made. We put down an amendment looking at the cost of duplication in public services.”
“I know that both you and Mr Burrows are desperate for my job, but let me tell you: we are the Opposition. If this is your audition, come back next year, lads, because you are not doing it very well. <BR /> <BR />In relation to what is in the motion, there is a legitimate debate to be had about efficiency in the public sector, but it is little or nothing to do with spending on issues to do with transgender people. That is a bizarre, inappropriate and weird crowbarring in of an issue that is so far from being responsible for wasteful public spending that it just seems absurd. Let me be clear: I care about the rights of trans people to be treated with dignity, but even if I was a hawk looking at every penny of public spending, that is such a trivial rounding error that it is absurd to insert it into this debate.”
“I can understand the argument for others, even in a political context, but anyway. Needed to go to Washington DC in multiple years. That is fine, but —.”
“We authorise all the spending that is done and we, particularly Executive Ministers, are collectively responsible for the performance of civil servants. When we come in here and rant and blame others we, and particularly those who are in the Executive Office, including the party that moved the motion, need first of all to think particularly about the responsibility that we have to lead and to give direction. <BR /> <BR />I should say that some of the issues that have been dragged up in this debate thus far, whether it is about the class of aeroplane that Mr Burrows flew on, or his cycling —. That is quite an achievement; I am actually quite impressed by that, although it is slightly bizarre. He talked about the Health Minister flying economy. Some people will be genuinely worried and will have asked why the Health Minister needed to go.”
“That has been a clarion call from the Northern Ireland Audit Office, but it has been clear, not just for years but for decades, that we have significant structural issues in terms of how we deliver public services here and how our Civil Service performs. Those are inextricably linked to all of us in the political class, and particularly, it must be said, to the two big political parties, who are wont, for their own political purposes, to collapse devolution when it suits them. <BR /> <BR />Before we get into talking about how public servants and civil servants perform, we need to reflect on the ultimate responsibility, which is seeking election and putting yourself forward to authorise spending, which we do. We did that a couple of weeks ago via a Budget Bill and a Vote on Account.”
“Listening to this debate this evening, I feel as if I have got into the back of a taxi while the cabbie is already in mid-rant, or I am in a pub and there is a boy on a bar stool saying, "And another thing —". I am sure that we have all had that while doing this job. A lot of Members have got up and ranted about a lot of things that are not entirely focused on what the motion is supposed to be about. <BR /> <BR />Of course, the motion itself is about a lot of things. It starts off with a commentary on wasteful spending in the public sector. To be clear, there is waste in the public sector. There is a profound need to reform the way the public sector works in Northern Ireland, including the performance and culture of the Northern Ireland Civil Service.”
“I genuinely thank you for that, Minister, but a lot of what you have said is about engagement and making the case to other people. Tomorrow, the Irish Government will announce a package of support. Your party, south of the border, has roasted the Irish Government for not doing enough quickly enough, but it is not clear that, up here, you have done very much at all. You understood three weeks ago that you needed more financial support from London — I am not disputing that need — so why did you not ask your officials then to urgently design what a support scheme could look like? People here who are struggling with costs feel that the Executive are sitting on their hands.”
“— please, when will the law be published?”
“Minister, we strongly support employment rights legislation and want to see it introduced. The problem is that it has not been introduced. Workers deserve to see it debated in the Assembly and to see it passed. With respect, however, your party has gone out with leaflets across the North saying that there is a 'good jobs' Bill: none of us in the Chamber have seen it. When will it be introduced? When Conor Murphy launched the consultation, he said that we had only two and a half years of the mandate left. That was nearly two years ago. Minister —”
“Minister, there has been a challenge with the opacity of how decisions are made on prioritising schools that are in urgent need of maintenance. I can think of two in my constituency. The first is Rosetta Primary School, about which you wrote to me recently. It has a school hall that is not safe, and that needs to be addressed. The second is Botanic Primary School, which is in real need of maintenance. I ask for clarity on how prioritisation is done. I understand that you are operating within a constrained budget, but how is it prioritised? <BR /> <BR />Minister, will you also give a brief update on the construction of a new build at Forge Integrated Primary School? Have you had any conversations with the Minister for Infrastructure about moving along the construction of that new build?”
“They have to engage with him diplomatically. You guys do not. Mr Buckley, you do not need to go over there and flatter him: it is not your job, but you have done it anyway. All the while, your constituents are paying the price of his unacceptable, reckless and meaningless bombardment of Iran, which is forcing up prices, destabilising the world and putting all of us at risk.”
“Let me say this to those who are celebrating, plámásing and praising Donald Trump and his Government: those Ulster Scots and Scots Irish would have had nothing to do with the lunatic — the crook — that is Donald Trump. They believed in a republic that was free from the Crown but with its citizens bound under law. People such as Ulysses S Grant did not believe in a vain emperor — a deluded fool such as Donald Trump. Mr Buckley is laughing. His constituents in Upper Bann are paying the price for Trump's madness and a war — an insane bombardment of Iran — that the DUP backed. It has nothing to do with people in Iran who want democracy. They are cowering in their homes and being bombarded by the US and Israel. Engaging with Donald Trump is a preposterous act. Some sovereign Governments have to engage with Donald Trump. They have a job to do.”