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“Clearly, however, the regulatory and enforcement regime for all those watercourses and marine environments is way out of date ecologically and, indeed, economically.”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 25 of 119.
“I exclude from that the Ulster Unionists, who tabled an amendment from their constitutional perspective with which I do not entirely agree. I do not agree with everything that the previous Member who spoke said, but at least they engaged with the need for more cross-border data-gathering and put their own perspective on it. From the DUP and TUV, we heard almost a long march of hostility to the idea of talking about greater cross-border data-gathering. That is genuinely a tragedy, not just for the people of the North of the island but for unionism. <BR /> <BR />I am one of the people who Pádraig Delargy talked about. Almost exactly 24 years ago, I left this island to go to university across the water and did not come back for basically another 20 years. When I did, I did so to become a politician here.”
“Thank you very much, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I am pleased to be able to wind up on this amendment, having chatted to my colleague Colin McGrath about some of the points that we wish to make. <BR /> <BR />Part of the challenge with the debate, initially, is that the motion is almost banal. I mean no offence to those who tabled it, because it is important stuff, but it is anodyne. It is almost just a description of something that is, theoretically, good. We have tried to put a bit of forward-based intent and policy direction into it through our amendment. It is a banal motion, although it notes something really important in more cross-border data-gathering, but it has to be said that we have seen a remarkable overreaction to it from some unionist politicians — not all of them.”
“For the purposes of being constructive, there is now this thing called the electronic travel authorisation (ETA), which does hamper people, and 70% of the people who come to Northern Ireland arrive via Dublin airport, whether we like it or not.”
“It is about acknowledging that the South has outperformed us, bluntly, in innumerable ways over the past decade or two. It is about mandating Executive Ministers to look positively at ways in which they can embrace cross-border collaboration and the information that will be in the joint census without prejudice to their constitutional view to build a better future for all of us in this society, whatever our constitutional view or identity, and to move beyond the barriers of partition, even if we do not share that constitutional aspiration.”
“<BR /> <BR />My gosh, if ever there were an area where we need more cross-border collaboration, it is in relation to the environment, not just because we share an ecosystem on the island but because of the protocol, the Windsor framework and the fact that we have an all-island animal health system. We share waterways, so the zebra mussels that are invasive and are damaging Lough Neagh have come up via the Shannon and the Erne, and our model of land ownership and small farming is cross-border because it predates partition. All those things inform the way in which we make public policy. <BR /> <BR />Our amendment to today's motion is a constructive one. I am sometimes accused of not being constructive. I am never accused of being concise, but I have tried my best today, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. Our amendment today is constructive.”
“I hope that, at some point, that will include people in this jurisdiction, as we choose a new future. However, in the meantime, we want all Executive Departments not just to note the census data but to work with it to actively find ways that they can use it to drive better performance. <BR /> <BR />I mentioned health. I agree with the Education Minister on very little — I put my name to a no-confidence motion in him a fortnight ago, so I can hardly be said to be at the top of his Christmas card list — but I acknowledge that he is working with the Shared Island unit to drive better outcomes for working-class kids in the North. That is one of the areas for which he is drawing down funding. That is an example of cross-border collaboration. I welcome that, and it does not threaten his constitutional perspective.”
“Sinn Féin has a particular analysis of many of the flaws of the Government in the South — there are many legitimate criticisms of them — but it is important that we acknowledge and say here that the Republic of Ireland has been, in broad terms, an astonishing success story since the 1980s. There are real challenges, particularly the distribution of wealth and the housing crisis, but, as advocates of a new Ireland, we would be kidding ourselves if we did not point to the many ways in which the South has transformed itself. It has gone from being probably western Europe's poorest country to being, per head of population, its richest. The next step, of course, is the need for it to become rich not only in theoretical terms or GDP statistics but in broader-based and more sustainable growth throughout the island and all the communities on it.”
“I want those people to embrace the potential for greater cross-border cooperation to drive better outcomes for people in the same way as I will champion and work in east-west and, as it were, UK and islands-wide collaboration that drives better outcomes for our people, regardless of the fact that I have a different constitutional aspiration. <BR /> <BR />We cannot avoid the clear fact that is before us, which is that the South has raced ahead of the North on performance. I will give one reason why, perhaps, that is not in the motion. It is sometimes respectfully put to me that my party is not a 32-county party in the same way as Sinn Féin is. That is fine; it is a legitimate point.”
“That is one reason why, whatever your view on the constitutional future, those areas should continue to be primary and priority recipients of Peace funding. <BR /> <BR />We do not want the census document just to be noted; as per our amendment, we want Departments to take active and proactive steps to use the information to find ways in which greater cross-border collaboration can be used to improve outcomes for the people who send us here. Once again, I say that without prejudice to the constitutional future. My party and I are clear that the best possible future for Northern Ireland and the whole island of Ireland is in a new Ireland without a border. However, I recognise that people have an equally legitimate aspiration to maintain the status quo.”
“Since then, however, and certainly in the past few decades, we have completely changed positions. The South has raced ahead of us in economic performance, education and life expectancy. I do not say that to carp or crow but simply to say that those are the facts. <BR /> <BR />Gathering the census data will demonstrate the many ways in which the gap in performance between the two parts of the island has widened. It is also true, as, I think, Emma Sheerin said in proposing the motion, that performance, whether it is measured in economic, employment or educational outcomes, tends to be worse in the areas that are closest to the border. The border counties have historically been the slowest-growing parts of both jurisdictions.”
“My party and I are completely unabashed in talking about that in the most optimistic and inclusive way that we can, because we think that the huge project for this generation and the next is to build a more empowered, inclusive, post-sectarian new Ireland. <BR /> <BR />Our amendment makes it clear not just that gathering the data is a good thing but that Northern Ireland lags behind the Republic in the most critical areas. The North now lags several years behind the South not just in health outcomes but in life expectancy. We know that, when Ireland was partitioned, this was the most industrialised and richest part of the island. That was one of the reasons for the momentum behind the anti-home rule movement and the movement to create what became Northern Ireland.”
“In one sense, all that we are doing is rediscovering and recapturing the kind of data gathering that happened on the island before partition. Whether or not you have a view on the constitution that relates to reunifying the island, that is a positive step. <BR /> <BR />Our amendment seeks to be more specific than the motion's theoretical positivity about simply gathering the data, so it looks with more focus at why you would want to gather it. Part of the reason why you would want to gather the data is not mentioned in the motion, and that is the fact that outcomes in most areas are so much better in the South than in the North. That is also one of the sharpest and most important reasons why, bluntly, many people are considering constitutional change and a new Ireland that is back inside the European Union.”
“<BR /> <BR />Even if you are not a designated nationalist or someone who believes in constitutional change, it is important that we understand the ways in which the different outcomes are being looked at in the joint census. If you are as geeky as I am and are interested in demography or genealogy, you can, of course, go online to the Irish public records office and look at the census records for 1901 and 1911. They are among the greatest historical records that exist for pre-partition Ireland. You can find your family entry. It is broken down by townland, and it is all-island, so it is 32-county.”
“For example, we have a brilliant and still relatively new healthcare facility in the form of the South West Acute Hospital (SWAH) in Enniskillen. It is criminally underused, however, despite the huge public investment that went into it and the state-of-the-art theatres that are sitting there. Part of the reason for that is that, in large measure, citizens who live in Leitrim, Cavan, Monaghan, south Donegal and north Sligo are not using its facilities, except in unusual circumstances, because they cannot. That is one of the distortions created by the border. It is therefore welcome that we are looking at the joint census publication.”
“God or, in light of the previous business, whatever entity one refers to help all of you. I will not take all 10 minutes. <BR /> <BR />This is an interesting subject for debate. There is a new census publication that looks at demographics on a cross-border basis. It is hugely useful, and it is important. It comes at the same time as a number of organisations are looking academically at the ways in which there is potential for greater economic growth, partnership and interdependence across the island of Ireland, as well as at the ways in which public services can be better and more appropriately delivered on a cross-border basis. <BR /> <BR />We can all list examples of where the existence of the border, at least in a hard sense, is a distortion of the delivery of public services. One obvious way relates to healthcare.”
“Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. Do I have five or 10 minutes?”
“Minister, with respect, there appears to be a bit of a Jekyll and Hyde thing going on with you today. There is a bit of a devil on your shoulder. On one shoulder, there is a Minister who wants to respond pragmatically and sensitively to a judgement, and, on the other shoulder, there is a person who wants to talk about witchcraft and bait people from different perspectives. In proceeding, for once and genuinely with goodwill, can you not listen to the devil on your shoulder and instead listen to whomever is residing on the other shoulder?”
“Further to that, Minister, and, indeed, further to a lot of what has been talked about today, we have had the worst time recently with planning. We all want to see staff be paid more, but we now have an overspend going into next year. This year, we will have, we hope, a multi-year Budget, which will mean an almost once-in-a-generation opportunity to plan and budget for change. Am I to understand that you are working with the Finance Minister so that we will have a multi-year Budget next to health transformation? Will the public be able to see, by the end of this year, the type of resource that you and the Finance Minister will devote to sorting out our health system?”
“First Minister, I am afraid that many of the people who lost loved ones in the pandemic will be frustrated with your answer, which is long on generic platitudes. We all can learn lessons, of course, but you were the deputy First Minister then and are the First Minister now. You are personally responsible, not simply in a generic way. <BR /> <BR />It is clear that one of the lessons to be learned concerns the toxicity and dysfunctionality of our political institutions. Do you agree with that, and will you commit to endorsing a programme of reform of Stormont before the end of the mandate? Please, First Minister, do not simply refer it to the Assembly and Executive Review Committee (AERC), on which I sit. We all know about the Committee. Do you endorse a programme of reform as a specific lesson arising out of the public inquiry?”
“I, like others in the Chamber, represent probably the most diverse constituency in the North. I have to say, and I am not spoofing, that most BAME individuals and communities are underwhelmed by the Executive's response to the race riots. One element of that is the criminal justice response. Is the Executive Office engaged with the Justice Minister on the sentencing Bill, and when will we finally get hate-crime provisions in law?”
“I said "move". I knew that. I do not understand why I am standing here talking.”
“I am pleased to move amendment No 1. Now, this motion was —.”
“I am concerned that those things not happening.”
“The Senior Civil Service should defend the integrity, objectivity and impartiality of the Civil Service.”
“<BR /> <BR />Subsequent to that, we have had confirmation that the Minister did not inform the UK Government of his decision to have a visit to a school in east Jerusalem that engaged his official responsibilities. Whether he or his permanent secretary deemed that to be official, he did not inform the UK Government. I am not an unionist and certainly do not think that the UK Government should have any ability to veto or say where devolved politicians visit overseas, but the Education Minister is a unionist. The UK Government's stated position for the past nearly 60 years has been that east Jerusalem is an occupied territory. It was confirmed to my colleague Colum Eastwood that no UK Minister would ever be advised to visit Israeli occupied territory. <BR /> <BR />Those are important matters. Accountability matters.”
“The Education Minister has confirmed to me that his view and that of his permanent secretary, which we heard in evidence to the Education Committee, is that that meeting did not represent "an official meeting" and, therefore, did not engage the provisions of the Functioning of Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2021. Subsequently, we have found out in answer to a question for written answer from Mr Carroll, that the meeting at the Ofek School in east Jerusalem was attended by a director and deputy director from the Israeli Ministry of Education. Therefore, an unofficial meeting at an Israeli government-run facility in occupied east Jerusalem, attended by two senior Israeli government officials, was not an official meeting: I merely place that on record. Others can judge whether they think that its unofficial status is credible.”
“However, I want to draw attention to information that has come out subsequently about the Education Minister's trip to Israel and the occupied territories and, indeed, the response of the Senior Civil Service (SCS) in order to put it on the record and to be clear about accountability. Some said, erroneously and offensively, that holding the Minister and, indeed, the broader Executive to account over that episode was merely party politics and sectarianism, and, at worst, some even alleged antisemitism. <BR /> <BR />Let us be clear about what has emerged since that day.”
“I associate myself with the previous remarks. <BR /> <BR />I want to talk about accountability. Since we came into opposition, we have made a specific point of addressing what has been a crisis in accountability in our politics. When the public see what happens in the Assembly, they feel that there is a crisis in accountability, that people are not answerable for their actions and that nobody is answerable for the quality or lack thereof of public services. <BR /> <BR />A fortnight ago, a motion of no confidence was tabled against the Education Minister. Per the provisions of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, that motion was not successful, so I do not propose to relitigate its terms.”
“To look on the bright side, since you said that you will bring forward other proposals for reform or will examine reform, when will we have those proposals? I think that lots of people looking at our system, with all the vexatious legislation and all the public health harms and the fact that rural pubs are shutting — we have the lowest number of pubs in the UK or Ireland — will be asking, "When will we have your proposals for reform?". Lots of people will be disappointed in the response today.”
“This, I am afraid, does nothing to protect them. It simply furthers the situation whereby they close. As for public health, when rural pubs close, off-sales open, where people buy 10 cans that they drink at home rather than two pints in the local pub.”
“Thank you, Principal Deputy Speaker. It was a bit like last orders there as I shouted to get my spake in first. <BR /> <BR />Minister, I am disappointed in that response, to say the least. I grew up, as it were, in pubs, having had pubs in my family and having worked in them. I care about protecting small and rural pubs.”
“I acknowledge that the Minister has worked constructively on this. It is an important example of how the legislative process should work. Obviously, it helps when there is an issue on which there is a degree of unanimity around the outcome, but it is important — I acknowledge the position that the Minister made clear — to say that this is not a desire to impose a charge willy-nilly at some point in the future. It is about designing legislation that is completely robust and can be operational when the secondary legislation enacting the scheme is finally brought forward. As a party, we are supportive of the position today and look forward to the Bill moving to Final Stage and then being enacted.”
“<BR /> <BR />I reiterate to the Chamber the Committee's unanimous support for the Bill. The ability to register deaths, in general, electronically and putting that into permanent legislation is an important consolidation of a change that happened during COVID. That will now be put on the statute book. Also, the ability to create a baby loss certificate is a really important opportunity for bereaved parents, as we have discussed and, I am sure, will discuss again at Final Stage. As I indicated, the Committee welcomes the Bill. We were critical to the introduction of the baby loss certificate provision. We undertook our scrutiny, and we are fully supportive of the process to move the Bill to Final Stage. <BR /> <BR />I will briefly say one or two sentences in a party capacity.”
“During Consideration Stage, the Committee was aware of those amendments submitted regarding the potential for charging for a certificate but did not take a specific view on them. <BR /> <BR />I note that the amendments were not moved in order to allow the Department the space to develop its own amendment that clarified the position on the potential for charging for a certificate. The Minister has now submitted his amendment on the issue, and I state for the record that the Committee has not discussed the amendment and, therefore, has not taken a position on it. I further note that current and former members of the Committee who submitted the previous amendments worked with the Department to bring a resolution to the issue, and I thank them for that work.”
“The Department confirmed to the Committee that a charge could not and would not be introduced without the approval of the House, and that is an important point. Even following the passing, I assume, of the amendment, that measure would have to come forward via a draft affirmative resolution in the future. <BR /> <BR />As I said, the Department confirmed to the Committee that a charge could not and would not be introduced without the approval of the House. Any potential charge would have to be introduced via subordination legislation through the draft affirmative process, allowing the statutory rule to be debated and amended. The Committee agreed, therefore, to proceed without its own amendment on the issue, although individual Members submitted their own amendments, as the Minister said.”
“I will speak to the Finance Committee's scrutiny of the Bill as Chair of the Committee and to the one amendment on the Marshalled List. <BR /> <BR />Clause 11 gives the Department the power to introduce a baby loss certificate scheme. The House previously supported the introduction of baby loss certificates, and it was the Finance Committee that ensured that those were included in the Bill. I am really proud of the work of the Committee on a cross-party basis and the constructive work that took place with the Minister and his Department. There was unanimity on the Committee that such a scheme be introduced. Committee discussions were, therefore, centred mostly around the potential in the future for a monetary charge.”
“On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. I want some advice — it may not be for today — on the appropriateness of making oral ministerial statements on proposals that are not practical proposals in the sense that they are only ideas. I say that because, a year ago, an oral ministerial statement was made by the previous Finance Minister about changes to the domestic rating system that still have not happened; one week later, we got a written ministerial statement on the 2025-26 Budget. Will the Speaker's Office give us advice on the appropriateness of making an oral statement on proposals that are not happening and then making extremely substantive statements via a written statement?”
“I support a more progressive rating system, and I support more support for small businesses. To be clear, however, the Minister is not announcing either of those things today; he is announcing more reviews. If I were to list the consultations on and reviews of the rating system that have taken place since last February, the Deputy Speaker would intervene on me — I know that he likes to do that, but I will not test his patience — because it would take a very long time. To small businesses and others who are interested in a more progressive rating system, the strategic road map appears to be a road to nowhere. So that I can be clear, Minister, do you have any intention of changing the rating system before the end of the mandate, considering that, so far, nothing has happened?”
“Is there a specific amount that you have asked for as a settlement from the multi-year Budget, and what is the upshot of those conversations?”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. On that issue, is he having conversations with the Finance Minister about a multi-year Budget? Obviously, his Department will have put in a return, or it will be in the process of doing so.”
“It is a small tax that is critical to getting people to reduce how often they fly, yet it is apparently an awful thing that must be abolished. <BR /> <BR />I say to those who tabled the motion to take responsibility. Do not gaslight people who face real pressures in their everyday lives. Do not table meaningless motions when you hold the posts of First Minister, Economy Minister, Finance Minister and Infrastructure Minister, which are positions that can take real steps. Take responsibility. Use the power that you have rather than simply transfer the blame to others at every opportunity.”
“As Mr Carroll said, those who have broader shoulders should pay more in order to help those who have less. Sinn Féin has not made that decision, despite having had the Finance Ministry for the past half decade and on another occasion before that. How is that the case? We had an indication from a previous Sinn Féin Finance Minister that they would abolish the domestic rates cap. That would be a small increase for people with more expensive homes, but we have had no indication of whether or when that will happen. Earlier today, we heard Sinn Féin's Economy Minister lambast air passenger duty, which is a tax that, I imagine, is paid largely by people who fly a lot, who, by definition, are people who can afford to fly.”
“We said, "Use some of it to mitigate the two-child limit". The Sinn Féin Finance Minister could have chosen to do that, but it was not done. Do not come to the Chamber today as if you have no responsibility and as if the only people who are ever responsible for bad things are the Brits or the DUP. Yes, they are responsible for bad things, but, if you seek office, you have to be accountable for the decisions that you do and do not take. <BR /> <BR />There is a problem when we are presented with such a motion, and it is particularly disappointing to hear people talk about how awful it is to raise revenue in any circumstances and their refusal to do so. If a party is on the left, as mine is, it has to be honest about the decisions that it wants to take.”
“When our politics is defined by a lack of responsibility, that is a problem. <BR /> <BR />It is true that successive British Governments have made appalling decisions. The two-child limit is appalling, indefensible and immoral, and I hope that it will be reversed in full. Sinn Féin cannot, however, take credit for some welfare mitigations while avoiding responsibility for the Executive's failure to mitigate the two-child limit, for which the SDLP put forward a practical proposal last year. We said how we would pay for it. We said that we would change how vacant property relief works and use the rates revenue from that. Our proposal arose not as a result of what is in the Sinn Féin motion today but as a result of a Sinn Féin Minister putting up a tax that, despite what is stated in the motion, impinged on working families.”
“Whether they are elderly people struggling to heat their home; working families or, indeed, families in which someone is out of work thinking about how they will pay for Christmas gifts; or parents having to go without in order to feed their child or get them an extra treat at Christmas, all those things should pinch at our conscience and be at the front of our mind every day. We need practical measures, not gesture motions. <BR /> <BR />While we support the motion and the amendment, therefore, it is important that I say, further to what my colleague Mark H Durkan said, that the motion is problematic for a number of reasons, particularly because it is the lead party in government putting forward a list of complaints about policies that it has overseen in a Government in which it is the biggest party.”
“They have got worse, yes, as a long-term consequence of some of the decisions made by UK Governments to squeeze spending — austerity, as it is often called — and, yes, as a result of international pressures, including the invasion of Ukraine by Russia and price gouging by lots of big companies. All those things have international consequences and broader challenges. <BR /> <BR />The key thing, as multiple Members have said today, is not that we come to the Chamber and complain about that but that we take practical measures to help the people who sent us here — the people whom we promised to help and who, as many Members said, face real hardship this winter.”
“I am pleased to speak towards the end of the debate to give my thoughts on the motion. Over the past number of years — in many ways, the past decade and a half but particularly since 2022 — we have been living through an extraordinary spike in the pressures facing ordinary working families and the most destitute. Costs have increased exponentially. We support the motion; we also support the useful amendment. <BR /> <BR />For some time, ordinary working families here have had the lowest disposable income, certainly, in the UK and in these islands in general. As we know, we have the highest levels of economic inactivity, child poverty and precarity. All those things are a shame on our society, and they have got worse over the past number of years.”
“I could not agree more with Ms Armstrong. Does she agree that more important than the motion from Sinn Féin is that, in addition to the Communities Minister putting meat on the bone of the anti-poverty strategy, the multi-year Budget published, we hope, by the Finance Minister before the end of the year puts in place a multi-year strategy for poverty reduction?”
“Minister, on the subject of electricity generation, critical to meeting our targets and reducing consumer bills is the North/South interconnector. When I asked your colleague the First Minister earlier about the North/South interconnector, she did not answer the question. It is going to be delayed for several years. Do you accept that it is critical that it is delivered? Do you accept that the North/South interconnector cannot be undergrounded because of cost? Do you want it to be delivered, and do you accept that it has to be delivered overground? Please be clear.”
“Ultimately, the need to purchase those homes is a failure of policy, particularly a result of the failure to build more social homes. Minister, you have cut the housing association grant. You have pledged to build just under 6,000 social homes by the end of the mandate, but it looks as though that target is not going to be met. Do you accept that it will not be met? Do you accept that the need to buy temporary accommodation is a consequence of the failure to build enough social homes?”