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“Clearly, however, the regulatory and enforcement regime for all those watercourses and marine environments is way out of date ecologically and, indeed, economically.”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 24 of 119.
“I accept that the former special adviser in the Department, Mr Martin, has drawn a distinction between the staff and the board. That is fair enough. We just need to understand why a body that was described as being "beyond repair" is now repairable. Obviously, it is great if you bring your car to a mechanic, and the first time that he investigates, he says, "Scrap it. It is useless", and then you go back to see him a couple of weeks later, and he says "Well, actually, I can fix it if you give me this amount of money". Perhaps that is a slightly facetious analogy, but I use it to simply say that these are things that we need to investigate and check. <BR /> <BR />I do not say this to be hyper-political, but the Minister has clearly undertaken a lot of initiatives in his Department.”
“Yes, if reform is robust and comprehensive enough, with a smaller board, an appointments process and updated investigatory and enforcement powers that are adequate, that is OK, but we need to be assured of that. That needs to come out in the Committee process, because it is not just a change of emphasis; it is a change in policy. We have not seen the advice that the Minister has received from his officials. I am not aware of whether the Committee has seen that advice yet. We have the upshot of the recommendations, but we do not have the detail or the basis on which they were made, nor have we seen — I certainly have not seen, but it may have been in the Committee packs — the detailed analysis of how performance has improved at a staff level.”
“Yes, absolutely. Of course, that is what the Committee is there to do. I was not undercutting the Committee's work. I am simply saying that these are questions that need to be asked. There is no harm in putting them in Hansard in the Second Stage debate. I have no shyness about being an effective Opposition and putting these points on, because that is what we are supposed to do. That is literally the reason why the Assembly created an official Opposition, so I am afraid that there will be no apology from me in that regard. <BR /> <BR />To go back to the point about the GTCNI and what changed, I do not have an ideological preference, and nor does the Opposition, for complete replacement if reform is possible.”
“We should not simply wave the Bill through without interrogating that. The Bill will now go to Committee Stage, and it will be for the Committee to interrogate that. The Committee Chair wants to come in.”
“I suggest that the Committee members need to ask those questions, because advice has gone to the Minister that said, "Be assured that performance has improved over the last couple of years, and we now advise you, Minister, that it is possible to make the requisite improvements by changing the structure of the board and inserting a public appointments process, rather than the election process" — the teaching unions are not thrilled about that — "and we are persuaded that that will deliver the changes we need to the General Teaching Council". We shall see.”
“Obviously, it had specific complaints about the board. On the face of it, we cannot support the Bill, but we acknowledge that it will go to the Committee, and the Committee should ask those questions. <BR /> <BR />The purpose of the Second Stage debate is to indicate whether the Bill has the overarching support of the Assembly. We are indicating that we cannot give our overarching support at this point, but we recognise that the Bill will go to Committee Stage.”
“I am reading from the report, and it says the:”
“That is a call not for restructuring or reform but for complete dissolution.”
“That is good to hear, but I am sure that the Committee will want to understand, unpack and challenge that advice in detail to be persuaded of that. Secondly, he said that his approach is, effectively, a quicker and more cost-effective way to achieve the improvements covered by the Baker Tilly Mooney Moore — that is a bit of a mouthful — review. That may well be true, and, if anything can be done in a more cost-effective and straightforward way, why not do that? Indeed, that should be the priority. <BR /> <BR />The review was robust and clear that the organisation, as the Minister acknowledged, had spent years in special measures and had never fulfilled in any real way the provisions that were given to it in the 1998 Order. The consultants' judgement was absolutely scathing:”
“It is somewhat concerning that the Opposition have to set the concerns on the record now, but I trust that the Committee will engage on all the questions. <BR /> <BR />The Committee Chair, Nick Mathison, mentioned that a couple of specific questions came up in the Committee's pre-legislative session. The SDLP Opposition and I also have those questions. The Minister touched on the first question in his opening remarks: why not do what his predecessor, his colleague Michelle McIlveen, who was just in the Chamber, had said would happen and wind up the General Teaching Council NI entirely and replace it with a new body? I understand, as the Minister said, that he received advice that suggested two things. First, it suggested that the culture, performance and staffing level of the GTCNI had improved radically over the past couple of years.”
“I speak on behalf of my Education Committee colleague, Cara Hunter. She is unwell, so I am stepping in. That is the reason that she is not in the Chamber. Clearly, I am not on the Education Committee, so I was not involved in any of the pre-legislative scrutiny, but the Education Minister loves to debate with and hear from me, so I made a special effort to come to the Chamber today to talk to him. <BR /> <BR />The General Teaching Council Bill is important legislation, and we want to hear more about it. It is not a Bill that we can endorse today, albeit we are not minded to divide on it. However, it is important that the Opposition put some robust questions and concerns on the record, and, assuming that the Bill proceeds through Second Reading to Committee Stage, those issues will need to be answered by the Committee.”
“— will do their jobs without intimidation.”
“That is grotesquely anti-democratic. <BR /> <BR />I stand in solidarity with colleagues not just in my party but in every party. I also say to all Members in the Chamber that we need to stand united as democrats against this kind of wicked and grotesque intimidation, which is being fomented online by parts of the far right. We do not know which international actors are helping to spread it. There is, apparently, no accountability for social media companies, but we cannot allow this incident to chill democracy. In Newry, Mourne and Down, as well as everywhere else, the people who are elected —”
“I have the utmost respect for representatives of all the parties that are represented in the Chamber who are on that council and who serve as elected representatives more broadly. They get up in the morning — often they have their own family responsibilities and things going on in their lives — and they do their best, whatever their political perspective, to represent their district and constituency. Those representatives put themselves forward; we all put ourselves forward. We put our faces on election posters and our names on a ballot paper. We put our email addresses and other contact details out there so that the people who elect us can contact us with their views and we can articulate those views. That is the precise opposite of the cowardice that is represented by people putting out a video threatening elected representatives.”
“That status is not in any way what lots of online misinformation has suggested that it is. Lots of that misinformation has been grotesque and deliberate, and online actors have used it to stir up hatred. Social media companies have allowed that to fester and ferment, and that has culminated in masked men regurgitating last night the tropes that so many of us thought that we on this island had moved on from. Masked men with guns issuing threats to elected representatives is grotesque, contemptible and unacceptable. <BR /> <BR />I do not wish to overestimate what this means, nor, however, do I wish to minimise it. Individuals have been elected to that council, many of whom are friends and colleagues of mine for whom I have the utmost respect.”
“I will speak on the same subject as Mr McMurray. No doubt, other local reps in the Chamber will wish to mention it. <BR /> <BR />Last evening, a video emerged to which I am almost loath to give the oxygen of publicity. It was clearly, in part, a disgraceful attempt to garner publicity for a group of masked men who were wearing balaclavas and holding what appeared to be weapons, although we do not know whether they were real. Thankfully, the PSNI has moved quickly to investigate. Those individuals sought to verbally intimidate and issue threats to elected members of Newry, Mourne and Down District Council, which stretches from Saintfield at the outskirts of my constituency all the way to Crossmaglen at the border. <BR /> <BR />A number of months ago, a vote took place endowing the council with the status of council of sanctuary.”
“First Minister, with respect, I think that a lot of people will be a wee bit baffled that, a year ago, an individual whom you told us was suspended from party membership and resigned his employment here because of his involvement in an incident will now not face charges, but, more than that, your party appears to have changed its story. So often, there is a kind of omertà that exists with your party, where stories are changed and people get a bit lost. I am afraid that this is true. I think that lots of people will think that that person did face consequences, and that is fair enough. If that person had no involvement and if there are no issues at all, why did he have to resign from his post, why was he suspended from party membership, and will both those roles be restored?”
“Thank you. Minister, given that you said that your Department is continuing to draft the Bill, I presume that it is not drafted yet. The 'good jobs' Bill was first trumpeted by your predecessor, Conor Murphy, way back in the early days after restoration in 2024, and you made an oral statement here in April of this year about the Bill progressing. Workers deserve clarity on the progressive legislation that they were and continue to be promised by you and your party. There is real concern that the Bill will either be watered down or timed out. Can you confirm that it will be introduced early in the new year, in time for it to be passed in this mandate?”
“The Minister mentioned the all-Ireland strategic rail review. I am glad that it was discussed because we want to see progress on that. I understand that just one third of a full-time equivalent official is working on it in the Department. Has the Minister specifically requested from the Finance Minister a multi-year budget line — a capital allocation — to deliver the all-Ireland strategic rail review, so that people can see how progress will be funded?”
“No, do your job. Tell us what you are doing.”
“Given everything that you and, indeed, the DUP have said about how awful the UK Government are and about how lots of what they are doing is wrong, will there be specific proposals on revenue raising and fiscal powers in that multi-year Budget, and when will it be published?”
“Minister, I agree with some of your analysis of the Budget. There are good things, including getting rid of the two-child limit, several bad things and lots of incoherent things. However, we are, fundamentally, not here to debate what is happening at Westminster. You and I are supposed to agree that we want more power brought back here, but only two of the 12 pages of your statement are about things that you propose to do, and there is not that much detail on those. So, to be specific, when will we see a multi-year Budget? Are we to understand that the Executive have even discussed a multi-year Budget?”
“On a point of order, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. It is important because we have a live proposal to the Business Committee. The point that my colleague made was not about the selection of the motions, it was about the timing. We have to submit our motions two weeks in advance. In every other jurisdiction on these islands — Dáil Éireann, Westminster, the Scottish Parliament — it is one week. Other parties in the Chamber do not want the SDLP to operate as a proper Opposition. That is their business, not ours.”
“Minister, to be absolutely clear, I have never advocated for water charges. That is a weird deflection from the fact that you and your party are doing nothing. In Dáil Éireann, Mary Lou McDonald said that the Irish Government are "a do-nothing Government". My God, it takes one to know one. Your plan is no plan at all. Social houses cannot be built, jobs cannot be created, factories cannot be built and our natural resources — Lough Neagh and Belfast lough — are falling into degradation because you will do nothing about the funding of NI Water. Is there any plan at all, or are you content to literally do nothing?”
“Minister, lots of people will be sympathetic with the priorities that you have outlined. Certainly, the two-child limit is immoral: it should never have existed and it needs to go. Are we to understand that, if the UK Government do not act on any of the priorities that you outlined, you will seek either to have new fiscal powers devolved or to find revenue to do those things yourself locally?”
“Thank you for giving way, and well done for ensuring that you get the extra minute. The Member talks about challenging UK Governments and says that that is what your MP Gavin Robinson is doing, etc: fair enough. Does that not mean that, ergo, it would be better for us to take more power here? If London is not to be trusted and you need to stand up, why do we not just take more power here and do it ourselves?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. The upshot of the Member not wanting more devolution here is that he is happy for all that power to be held in London. I have not heard the TUV praise the British Government in a while. Can he tell me the last British Government that he supported or the kind of future British Government that he would support? I am at a loss.”
“It is not in Standing Orders, but I am sure that the Speaker's Office has a view on whether smearing civil servants, who work for every Minister, including the Finance Minister, is appropriate. However, I understand why Members want to do that — to deflect from their own record. A Member who was a Minister previously would not smear her civil servants in the Department for Communities, but she has just done it today. Pathetic.”
“On a point of order, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker.”
“It is about treating the people whom we serve with respect as we give them choices now and in the future. We need to empower our people to build something new in the North now and in the new Ireland that we seek to build in the future. Those are our plans, Minister: tell us yours.”
“The first ever republican Finance Minister, Michael Collins, managed to raise a bond worth £20 million in today's money, and he did so while operating in secret. Minister, you have hundreds of civil servants working for you, so the questions that I ask are not unreasonable. They are pressing for two reasons. First, there is virtually unanimous agreement in the Chamber that the UK Government cannot be trusted to prioritise our interests. Secondly and more importantly, you and I represent parties that seek to build a new Ireland, which, at its core, is about building something new on the island. It is about taking the power into our own hands and not simply allowing London to do everything for us. It is about not simply blaming others, not demoralising and disempowering people and not insulting their intelligence with drivel and nonsense.”
“How do you propose to fund essential investment in waste water infrastructure? That is not an optional treat. A developer levy? Tell us more. An infrastructure bond? Tell us more. You are responsible for answering those questions.”
“We have called for an innovative use of Executive borrowing powers to help pay for water investment. However, Minister, the clue is in the title: you are the Minister, and we are the Opposition. If you want us to do your job for you, we are happy to do it, but you will have to give us proper access to official costings. <BR /> <BR />Minister, what powers do you want, and how do you want to take them? Do you agree with the Fiscal Commission that income tax powers should be devolved, as they are in Scotland? If so, do you think that we should have an intermediate tax rate and a higher personal allowance, as they do there?”
“Apart from the Treasury, the biggest obstacle to doing that is cynicism from a public who have lost all faith in the ability or willingness of local leaders to take responsibility. Madam Principal Deputy Speaker, can you blame them? <BR /> <BR />It does not have to be that way, however. Despite what the Finance Minister sometimes says, as Opposition, we have published a range of proposals. Indeed, many of those proposals have later been embraced by him and his colleagues; they have just not been enacted. From curtailing vacant property relief to ending the early repayment discount, we proposed those measures and we would support them if they ever came to the Floor. We proposed a levy on big agri-food companies to help to fund the recovery of Lough Neagh and nature restoration.”
“There is no doubt that it has become deeply sceptical of anything that looks like more revenue-raising or fiscal power. To be honest, however, who knows what the DUP actually wants? It hated the previous Tory Government, who shafted it on the protocol after shafting everyone else here on Brexit. It now hates the Labour Government, too. Presumably, it is waiting on the next British Government so that it can hate them, too. It is not so much a case of 'Waiting for Godot' as it is waiting for Nigel, a leader who is so committed to the unionist cause that he will do you an "up the 'Ra" video for the price of a few pints. Apparently, we are content for those people to make decisions about our future. <BR /> <BR />The case for raising more local revenue and taking more fiscal powers locally has been more than made: it is overwhelming.”
“It has been mooted by the current Finance Minister, who was formerly the Infrastructure Minister, but there is no detail and no timescales — just sound bites — as our water system holds back the delivery of affordable homes and new jobs. Sinn Féin wants credit for not doing something that only it can do and is not on the agenda anyway. In reality, it is doing nothing. It is happy to let London or the DUP take the blame while this place struggles. Earlier this month, the Sinn Féin leader of the Opposition in Dáil Éireann said that the Irish Government were a "do-nothing Government". I hear you, Mary Lou. Just wait till you hear what is happening up here. You guessed it: nothing. Talk about it taking one to know one. <BR /> <BR />Of course, the DUP is often cited as the reason for blocking fiscal devolution.”
“I am not aware of any party in the Assembly that is actively proposing domestic water charges. The only person who has the legal power to commence water charges is the Infrastructure Minister. Is she protecting households from herself? Of course, she and the Executive more widely are not doing anything on water, as we have seen in today's announcement that the Office for Environmental Protection is launching an investigation into the Minister and her colleague. <BR /> <BR />Just look at what has not happened with fiscal devolution and the changes to the rating system. Look at the plans — the announced or mooted plans — for a developer levy to fund waste water investment. Nothing has happened.”
“Just before I got to my feet, I got an answer by email from the Infrastructure Department telling me that a street in Finaghy, which is in my constituency, is not being resurfaced due to — you guessed it — austerity. Apparently, those things are all victims of austerity rather than ministerial choices and priorities. Even amid such austerity, it has apparently still been possible to find well over £10 million since 2020 to subsidise non-existent long-haul flights via zero air passenger duty (APD); a Sammy Wilson policy that the Sinn Féin Economy Minister still stands over. <BR /> <BR />In the past few days, the Infrastructure Minister has released a social media video, seeking credit for protecting households and workers from water charges. From whom was she protecting them?”
“The term "austerity" has, shamefully, been turned into a cliché by politicians, particularly, it has to be said, by Sinn Féin Ministers, who have trivialised it by using it as an alibi for a bewildering array of delivery failures. That is especially true of the Minister's former Department: Infrastructure. According to responses to questions for written answer, since February 2024, austerity has been responsible for more than 200 small and medium-sized projects not proceeding. It has been responsible for, among other things, the failure to build a park-and-ride in Comber. That was austerity. There is no Ballykelly bypass. That is austerity. There has been no resurfacing of the Crawfordsburn Road in Bangor. That is austerity, too. The Dial-a-Lift community transport service is not working. That is austerity.”
“Those may be dry spreadsheet exercises for officials, but they can have devastating consequences when they are translated into policies that affect benefits recipients or low-income families, who have to live with the reality of having their standard of living and quality of life squeezed in order to satisfy forces that are beyond their control. That is the immoral act of austerity that we talk about so much here. <BR /> <BR />All Governments should practise responsible fiscal policy, but it is now widely held that making the less well off shoulder the burden of meeting arbitrary fiscal targets is not simply immoral but economically stupid.”
“Again, not only have those things not happened, but they have not even been discussed by the Executive. No finger of blame can be pointed at others, as, under paragraph 24 of the 'Conduct of Executive Business', three Ministers can insist that an item be placed on the Executive agenda. Sinn Féin has four Ministers but, for whatever reason, it has chosen not to use that power. <BR /> <BR />We do not yet know what will be in tomorrow's Budget. We do know, however, that the handling of the UK Budget has been chaotic. This may be the first time that a British Government have U-turned on a Budget before it was actually delivered. We know that much of that chaos has resulted from the fetishisation of arbitrary fiscal rules, with screeching policy adjustments being required to meet those rules and satisfy bond markets.”
“We know that there was a discussion in the Executive on 6 November, at least, but the Minister and his colleagues have been pathologically cautious about doing anything at all, because it is easier to blame someone else. <BR /> <BR />Last week, the Finance Minister told the Assembly — after his officials had already told the media — that he hoped to proceed, at some point, with reform of vacant property relief and with some reform of small business rates relief. There was an Opposition proposal on that more than a year ago. We support the Minister's intent, but he offered no detail on when it would happen or even on when the Executive would discuss it. It is well over a year since his predecessor, Caoimhe Archibald, said that she would remove both the cap on domestic rates and the early repayment discount.”
“We know — the Finance Minister and I agree on this — that too much power lies in London and that, all too often, that power is not used for the real benefit of people here. We know that the priorities of successive UK Governments have not been aligned to our needs and those of our citizens. We know that what we have in place now does not work. None of that, however, absolves us from using the power that is at our disposal to make real change or, perhaps more importantly, given the day that's in it, to seek new fiscal powers with which to deliver for our people. That has been the stated policy intent of Sinn Féin Finance Ministers for years: they even spent £0·5 million on a Fiscal Commission to make recommendations, but none of those recommendations has been implemented.”
“Thank you, Principal Deputy Speaker. This is the final Opposition day of 2025. It comes at a crucial moment, because, within the next 24 hours, the UK Chancellor will announce her Budget. The measures announced will have a huge impact on ordinary citizens, but also on the Executive as they plan for what we hope will be — we say, today, that it must be — the first multi-year Budget in a decade and a half to be released before the end of the year. <BR /> <BR />We do not want to talk today about simply the dry process of Budget-setting but about why so little trust and faith are placed in our Executive, and in our politics in general, to deliver for people. The reason for that is the failure to take responsibility for making real changes to people's lives.”
“Even if we are not selling it, and we want to maintain the constitutional status quo, we should all be able to embrace the huge potential of greater cross-border working. I commend my party's amendment and, indeed, the motion.”
“Rather than having a general debate that takes note of its existence, we need to see responsibility-taking in the Executive for driving that agenda forward, particularly from those parties who say that they are committed to it. <BR /> <BR />That brings me on to my next point. Without prejudice to the constitutional future — I say that as a new Irelander — I also say this: the census, by itself, will not get us to a new Ireland. We will have to persuade people and lead that debate. We will have to explain it to people who are — I heard Members from the Alliance Party talk about them — open-minded, unconvinced and persuadable on the subject. They want to hear about the benefits of change. They do not just want to hear about the fact that it will inevitably happen. We need to sell it.”
“<BR /> <BR />We have talked about public services and public policy challenges. It is vital that we get that right, whatever the constitutional future is. I also say this, however: Ministers here, including Ministers from the party that tabled the motion, need to take responsibility for driving those things forward. The motion does not call on a Minister. The Minister with responsibility for the census is, of course, John O'Dowd, the Finance Minister, who will be in front of us tomorrow for questions. He, or, indeed, the First Minister and deputy First Minister, would be best placed to answer questions on how the Executive could make use of that census.”
“Of course, I do not mean all unionists in the Chamber, because the Ulster Unionists tabled a very constructive amendment. I may not necessarily agree with it, but it at least endeavours to engage with the debate. <BR /> <BR />I genuinely believe that, whether or not we have a new Ireland — I believe that we are moving in that direction — it is important that we maximise every opportunity to improve services on a cross-border basis. Frontier workers are not a threat. Those frontier workers are a real, everyday fact of life on the island. They are not just in Newry and Derry but in Belfast. My brother is a frontier worker. He works for a bank that is headquartered in Dublin, and he travels up and down and works remotely. That is a fact of life. He has to navigate all the bureaucratic complexities that that involves.”
“If the motion were about east-west data gathering, I, as someone who spent most of my career working in London as a civil servant in the UK Government, would not be saying, "No, we cannot possibly gather that data or look at UK-wide statistics, because that threatens my aspiration for a new Ireland". I do not think that. Even after we have a new Ireland and are back inside the European Union, we will have to work really closely on these islands for all the reasons why the Good Friday Agreement enshrines partnership across these islands. It enshrines the British identity on this island. We are also neighbours. Our services and lives will still be entwined in many ways. I have no difficulty in acknowledging that. It is a tragedy for unionism that, in the current constitutional set-up, some unionists cannot do that.”
“I would not necessarily recommend that as a career move for which to come back to the island of Ireland, if any impressionable 20-something Irish people out there are listening. Having said that, I did come back. One reason why some do not come back, if they are from the North, is that when they turn on their TV — or, more likely, their devices — and look at politics, they hear statements — I mean this with the greatest respect to Mr Gaston, who put his point across with some passion, and Members of the DUP — talking about, my God, the idea of framing cross-border data-gathering as something with a kind of hex that has to be guarded against because there demons lie and we are on a slippery slope to a united Ireland if we even talk about cross-border data-gathering.”