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“Clearly, however, the regulatory and enforcement regime for all those watercourses and marine environments is way out of date ecologically and, indeed, economically.”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 42 of 119.
“I thank my colleague for giving way. She mentioned teenagers. Does she agree that it is not just teenagers? I have a seven-year-old, who is soon to turn eight. He has grown up seeing his parents inevitably looking at their phone, and occasionally he has a screen in front of him, so it has become part of his day-to-day reality. Those behaviours are embedded in him, and he is already asking about getting access to more and more things. The need to set boundaries early is the reason that the motion is so important.”
“On a point of order, Mr Speaker. During Question Time just past, I engaged with the Minister to seek clarification on the North/South interconnector. The Department that granted planning permission is, of course, the Department for Infrastructure, but it is it clear that her Department supports and is a key delivery partner for the North/South interconnector, as per the planning that has been granted by the Department for Infrastructure. Are you or your office able to clarify whether it is in order for Ministers to effectively contradict a legal position of another Department?”
“Minister, I am really confused. You have said on multiple occasions from that lectern that you think that the North/South interconnector needs to be undergrounded. I am on the Department's website, which makes it clear that the planning permission that your Department sought is for an overground North/South interconnector. Are you saying one thing while your Department is delivering another? I strongly support the North/South interconnector, but a colleague of yours in the South, Mr Darren O'Rourke TD, appears to object to it. How can you be taken seriously as an Economy Minister who will deliver critical infrastructure when you say one thing and do another and contradict yourself in the Chamber?”
“Those are all consequences of tightening immigration that our economy and people face.”
“We also have a pre-existing, pernicious immigration control policy that will devastate the tourism economy in Northern Ireland and on the island of Ireland: the electronic travel authorisation (ETA). As people know, the overwhelming majority of visitors come into Northern Ireland across the border via Dublin Airport or, indeed, another port of entry in the Republic. They see travelling to this island, whatever about the politics and jurisdictional questions, as simply visiting Ireland. That is not a political statement; it is a statement of fact. We know that, for tour groups, the added bureaucracy and cost will create a challenge and make it harder to visit the amazing attractions that we have up here, be it the Giant's Causeway, Titanic Belfast, St Patrick's grave in Downpatrick or any of the other brilliant attractions.”
“Those sectors range from parts of our fintech sector in Northern Ireland, which has occasionally had challenges in bringing in people post Brexit, to our fishing industry, which, as many people will know, has benefited not only from our local and, if you like, indigenous fishing communities but from skilled people who come from other parts of the world.”
“It was a sharp shift rightward that many people in Northern Ireland do not want and from which our economy will suffer. <BR /> <BR />I will talk about some of the broader conclusions in a moment, but, more specifically, there will be real-world consequences from the kinds of policies on UK immigration that Keir Starmer's Government announced. Clamping down on care workers will impact on our health service and our care sector. Increasing salary thresholds will affect a wide range of sectors, which have already suffered from labour access issues in Northern Ireland.”
“Thank you. <BR /> <BR />Yesterday, the UK Government launched their White Paper on immigration reform. It marked a step change in their approach to immigration in a sharply rightward direction. Those who read the Prime Minister's remarks or, indeed, those of the Home Secretary will not find, as far as I can see, a single word of clear praise for immigration and the benefits that migration, new communities and entrants with skills, talent, energy and hope can bring to our society and societies everywhere. I acknowledge, because it is obvious, that no state can have a completely uncontrolled migration system. Of course, every state in the world applies rules on immigration, but it is clear that what happened yesterday is part of a trend in British politics that has been happening for more than a decade.”
“Thank you very much, Mr Speaker, for accepting this Matter of the Day. I want to double-check that I have five minutes to make an opening statement. Is that correct?”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. Is the upshot of what the Minister is saying that he cannot produce any strategy until there is complete agreement on all aspects? If the Minister is willing to clarify, that would be helpful. He seemed to indicate that there is not consensus on certain aspects of the panel's recommendations, so it would be helpful if he could clarify whether he is willing to bring forward a strategy of sorts, or must it have complete agreement?”
“I stand with them today. I do my best, but I am afraid that my time has run out. Mr Buckley has lots to say on the subject in the Chamber, and he is entitled to do so. I am saying that, if you are trans, you will be treated with respect, dignity and courtesy as we proceed through this policy debate.”
“Sometimes some of us have perhaps been a little too quick not to take the time to explain to people for whom questions of gender identity are new what some of those things mean and to reassure people that the questions on safety and sport can be dealt with in a way that is sensible and humane and neither jeopardises safety nor stigmatises people. That is not impossible, particularly because trans people are a tiny proportion of the population. We do not need to trade off one set of rights or one set of opportunities in order to treat trans people properly and with esteem. That is my position and that of others in my party.”
“That person was middle-aged before they began the formal process of transitioning, and they were someone with whom I had a lot in common professionally. Our lives and our professional lives intersected purely because we were talking about a lot of the same things on a day-to-day basis. In getting to know someone who was trans and going through the transitioning process, I did something that, I fear, we do not do enough of, which was to acknowledge and treat those people as ordinary people. <BR /> <BR />Let me also say that, for many people, questions about gender identity are relatively new.”
“They are living as productive members of society who try to get on with their day. They live their life, use the loo when they have to, get dressed, go out in the morning, have a job and have relationships — all those boring things that the rest of us have to do. <BR /> <BR />I fear that our debate has fallen into a trap where we do not just other those people but treat them as something to be talked about as though their lives are a kind of science project or a weird species that needs to be put off to one side and talked about as if they are not ordinary human beings. About 10 years ago, when I was still a civil servant in London, I had my first proper encounter with a trans person, who I got to know as a colleague of mine in a Civil Service department.”
“This is a consequence of not doing those things quickly, because we now have a Minister from a different party who appears to be — perhaps he can update us on this — less enthusiastic about getting on with it, as it were. <BR /> <BR />It is impossible to have this debate, which is about the broader question of homophobia, biphobia and transphobia, without acknowledging the particular context here today and, indeed, over the past number of weeks around the question of trans rights and the related issues that have been thrown up by the Supreme Court judgement. As we speak, we have upstairs in the Long Gallery people from the Rainbow Project, other trans rights activists and people who are not necessarily activists but are just trans people going about their ordinary lives.”
“We tolerated, indulged and, indeed, celebrated homophobia and other forms of prejudice based on sexual orientation or gender orientation for far too long in this society, and that is, frankly, impossible to deny. Some of those who debating today and talking about the question of trans rights are in parties that, bluntly, spent decades trying to "save Ulster from sodomy" — I believe that that was the phrase. That is part of the historical context that we should reflect upon and have in our mind. <BR /> <BR />The motion calls for the speedy publication of an LGBTQIA strategy by the Department. That is sensible. Indeed, it has been awaited for some time. The previous Minister began that work; it was not published. I wish that it had been published in the previous mandate.”
“I had not initially planned to speak, but, having heard my colleague Sinéad McLaughlin and others, I will give my reflections on this important subject, given the level of public interest. I have spoken before on the issue, but it is important that we all speak up when we get the opportunity. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the fact that we are speaking to this motion on International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia and Transphobia. It is important to acknowledge the historical context that has been talked about by others. The historical context is that Northern Ireland was a laggard internationally and in the UK when it came to, first, abolishing outdated sodomy laws and, secondly, questions of equal marriage and esteeming LGBTQIA+ people in a way that looked at them as human beings and not simply as categories to be othered.”
“I appreciate the Member's giving way. He talked about the importance of having a sexual orientation and gender equality strategy but also seemed, effectively, to endorse the DUP amendment, which removes the compulsion to produce that strategy, as it just says that the Minister will continue to work on the strategy.”
“I am keen to understand, Minister. Clearly, it is a comprehensive and ambitious plan that you have set out, and one that you have been working on for some time. Has it been discussed in detail at the Executive? If so, did all parties' Ministers agree to it?”
“Deputy First Minister, people here, particularly young people, want more than endless rows over signs and statues. Do you think that you and the First Minister, given all the money that you have spent on travel, are providing value for money for the Northern Ireland public?”
“Deputy First Minister, I appreciate that you have secured agreement to a Programme for Government and a Budget. Those are the bare minimum that any Government should do. Most people who watch politics here have seen your party, probably with the acquiescence of your main partner in government, Sinn Féin, delivering nothing but inaction. You have turned politics here into one long Old Firm game.”
“Notwithstanding the outcome of the court case, which is a court case and needs to be understood and acknowledged, will you, as deputy First Minister, make any attempt to reach out specifically to people in the trans community — ordinary trans people, including those who are having an event upstairs in the Building today — who feel anxious and, at times, frankly threatened by some of the language that is used in politics, in order to assure them that they are esteemed and should be treated with proper respect?”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. I genuinely appreciate her coming to give us a detailed update. She is entirely within her rights to clarify and push back on certain statements that she sees as wrong. <BR /> <BR />Given that it sounds like, if there is consensus on what is being delivered, the questions are about how it can be implemented. Will you put a deadline on delivering the work and then say to people who are interested, "We will engage with you on how we will deliver it, but it is happening by this date"?”
“I do not know where the concerns are, but there will always be someone who uses a particular rat run in a city, whether a taxi driver or someone who operates a business. Does the Member agree that the simple fact of someone using a route is not, if there is overwhelming public interest in its being pedestrianised, a legitimate concern that outweighs that or even merits real attention beyond a certain point?”
“When people go to Shop Street in Galway or Grafton Street in Dublin, they walk down a pedestrianised street and enjoy the feeling of festivity and being closed off from traffic. Why can we not get it done in Hill Street and Gordon Street in Belfast? Let us sort it out. Let us get it done ASAP. I welcome the fact that the Minister is here. I hope that she is able to give us clarity on when we will have the project completed.”
“Let us get it done. I hope that the Minister is able to give us a date today for when it will be completed. I assume that it can be done fairly quickly. I do not think that it will involve massive amounts of infrastructure, or that any planning processes will need to be gone through. Some legislative device may be needed. I imagine that we could get unanimity in the Chamber and that, if the Minister needed to bring something forward in legislative terms, we could get it swept through the Assembly really quickly. Frankly, let us finally show the people out there that we can get something done, even if it is something seemingly small and modest. Let us support our amazing hospitality offer in the Cathedral Quarter in Belfast. Let us shut it off to traffic.”
“By the way, we have also effectively been subsidising it through rates reductions, whether in the reliefs that were offered for derelict properties or some of the exemptions that were given to the organisations that own it. When we are giving a rates exemption to a derelict block, it is ridiculous that, next door, we are also not maximising the potential of Hill Street and Gordon Street.”
“<BR /> <BR />This is something that we can do and that should be straightforward: pedestrianising a street in the middle of Belfast. People love this part of Belfast but it has challenges. We are not allowing it to meet its full potential. In a previous debate in the Assembly, we talked about the long-running farce that is the Tribeca project. In fairness, I am not trying to pin that one on the Infrastructure Minister. That is nothing, so far as I am aware, to do with her and her Department. However, it is true to say that there is amazing potential in the Cathedral Quarter. We already have a situation in which an entire block in inner north Belfast is being left to rot. That is shameful.”
“We can debate lots of motions in this place that do not go anywhere, though they are important, we can publish lots of promises and we can put vague aspirations in the Programme for Government. However, it comes down to doing something as straightforward and, frankly, as easy as pedestrianising a beloved street in the middle of Belfast, which will increase its hospitality potential, make it safer, make it more attractive and protect some of its built heritage. There are cobblestones and flags that need to be protected, as was pointed out to me earlier. High volumes of road traffic, whether at peak time or vehicles using the area as a rat run during the day, does not help to protect the historic character of the area.”
“I am glad that the Member has offered that clarification. Cost constraints were put in a written answer as a reason. I am not saying that, and I did not make it up: it was put in a response to a question for written answer by Mr Brett. We can move on from that point because we have clarified it. We can park that argument, but it should not have been made in the first place. There should not have been any delay, whatever the reason for it. <BR /> <BR />There are concerns, bluntly, about the ability of the Executive, and specifically of the Department for Infrastructure. My colleague Nichola Mallon probably had to fight some of the same battles that the Minister now has to fight inside that Department. I recognise that it is not an easy Department to operate. However, we need to persuade the public that this place can deliver.”
“One reason to minimise the number of road transit vehicles is to make the area more accessible for people who are wheeling, whether they are people with disabilities or are using prams or Motability devices. We want the area to be as accessible and used as possible. I want to maximise the number of people who enjoy themselves in Hill Street and Gordon Street, not just on Friday and Saturday nights but throughout the week. There are, frankly, amazing world-class pubs and venues in that area. I could list them all in order to curry favour with the businesses, but I will not. We all know what they are: places that we go to and enjoy at the weekends. They deserve to have what they think will help to make the area an even more beloved and successful part of the city. <BR /> <BR />We also have the context —.”
“If we really cannot find five grand to close off a couple of streets in the middle of Belfast's Cathedral Quarter, I am tempted to say that, at the end of the debate, I will happily start a GoFundMe page. I am sure that the businesses in the area and others who use it would be more than happy to stick in a few bob for us to buy the bollards and do the requisite work. I do not mean to be facetious, but, at times, we need to get real about how we use language. When we bandy about terms like "austerity" in relation to putting in a couple of bollards, we need to get real.”
“We devalue the importance of the debate around austerity and the seriousness of that issue by saying, "Austerity stopped us pedestrianising Hill Street and putting in a couple of bollards". Frankly, saying that insults the public's intelligence and that of the traders and those who run the amazing hospitality businesses and venues on Gordon Street and Hill Street, the staff who have to come and go from them and the people who use them.”
“Calling it out will annoy people, but the answer to a question for written answer was that austerity stopped the pedestrianisation of Hill Street and Gordon Street. It is important to say that "austerity" means a decision to constrain public spending by the UK Government and other Governments around the world, particularly in the wake of the global financial crisis of 2008. It was a pernicious thing and a wrong economic and political judgement that has led to all sorts of distorted outcomes, such as a squeeze on welfare spending. Austerity has had hugely destructive outcomes for people and communities in the North and, bluntly, around the Western world, but it has not stopped five grand being spent on putting in a couple of bollards in the Cathedral Quarter, and it is absolute nonsense to say otherwise.”
“OK. I am genuinely glad that the Minister has offered that clarification, because it is now on the record that there are no objections, and none of the concerns that I have heard should be insurmountable. One of the previous questions was about the location of a car park where Talbot Street meets Hill Street, and that has now changed. I understand that the scheme has been moved slightly further down the street, and that does not fundamentally change the core purpose of the scheme. There is literally no good reason why the pedestrianisation has not happened already. <BR /> <BR />One argument that has been offered and was put on the record, so it is important to challenge and call it out.”
“I say all that as a preamble to the debate because pedestrianising Hill Street and Gordon Street is neither difficult nor expensive. There is literally no good reason why those streets have not already been pedestrianised. <BR /> <BR />A pilot was first introduced, as, I am sure, will be pointed out in the debate, by Nichola Mallon, the SDLP Minister at the time. She set up a pilot scheme, and there was some discussion or questions at that point about the pedestrianisation of Hill Street, but, subsequently, we have heard from the Minister and her predecessor about objections to that. As far as I am aware, there are literally no live objections.”
“Pedestrianising those streets is not just a small, local issue; it is about maximising the economic, social and cultural benefits of that brilliant hub in the Cathedral Quarter. <BR /> <BR />Lots of things in politics are really hard — they are complicated and difficult and involve trade-offs, vested interests and challenges that can be philosophical, bureaucratic and economic — and lots of other things are expensive and cost money. We live in a world of finite resources. We are a devolved Administration that does not receive enough money, and we all agree on that. Even if we raised all our own revenue, we would have a limited amount of money to spend. Lots of things are expensive and difficult to do for that reason. Lots of things are not just difficult or expensive, they are difficult and expensive.”
“Before I go any further, those watching the debate or who might see it later on social media may want to know more about Hill Street. Hill Street and Gordon Street, which is perpendicular to it, are, as people who have been out in the Cathedral Quarter — many have — will know, are the cobblestoned streets that host some of Belfast's most famous hospitality venues. The world-famous pubs and photo and selfie opportunities outside the Duke of York on Hill Street are well known, but it also has amazing restaurants, such as Waterman House, and venues, such as the Black Box and the Oh Yeah Music Centre on Gordon Street. It is not just an asset for North Belfast; it is a regionally significant part of our central hospitality offer in the city of Belfast.”
“I thought that we would find unanimity for once in the Chamber on that. <BR /> <BR />I am glad to bring the subject to the Assembly Chamber for debate today. On the subject of building consensus, I acknowledge Damien Corr from the Cathedral Quarter Business Improvement District (BID) and Belfast's night czar, Michael Stewart, who have joined us in the Public Gallery for the debate. I also acknowledge, in the spirit of building cross-party consensus, that Mr Phillip Brett, a DUP MLA, has made a lot of noise — good noise — on the subject. Hopefully, there will be a degree of cross-party support on the issue and we can make progress. <BR /> <BR />We want to use our platform to advance a cause that should be straightforward. It should be a small, straightforward thing to pedestrianise one street in the Cathedral Quarter of Belfast.”
“Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I hope that I will not use all the 15 minutes, and I would say that everybody else hopes that I will not use all the 15 minutes either.”
“On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. On a previous occasion when a motion was passed in the Assembly with a call for the Irish Government or for Dáil Éireann more broadly, I believe that a letter went from the Speaker to the Irish Government. I just wondered if the Speaker's Office could advise on whether that precedent will be followed in this case.”
“I am grateful to the Member for giving way. Notwithstanding some of his remarks about it being a foreign head of state — he is entitled to make that statement, but, obviously, I do not agree with that — for the purposes of information, can he tell me how I can go about voting for the head of the UK state? That is not entirely clear to me. Could he advise me on how I can do that?”
“I want them to be respectful of the fact that many of us would like to live in a republic and that many of us think that the true gold standard of citizenship is being able to choose your head of state. Many people in this part of Ireland, be they those from unionist or nationalist backgrounds or those who are somewhere in between or who simply do not care, would very much like to choose their president and choose a president of Ireland. It is an entirely sensible measure.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is also true that, for 14 of the past 20 years, the president of Ireland was from Belfast. She was somebody from Mr Brett's constituency, in fact, and a brilliant president she was. She built bridges with the unionist people of this island. I do not think that having people of the North voting in a presidential election threatens anybody's identity or vision of the future. <BR /> <BR />I have spent more of my adult life living on the island of Britain than the island of Ireland. I am now a politician here, and I make no apology for wanting to unite the people of this island in a new Ireland, but I will always be respectful not just of the unionist tradition but of many unionist people's relationship with the royal family and the monarch.”
“One of the developments that we have seen somewhat uncomfortably in the past little while is a new definition. Occasionally, it has felt as though the primary and senior meaning of the word "Ireland" is the state rather than the island. For those of us who live in this part of Ireland and want to participate not just in the broader Irish nation but in politics on a cross-border and all-island way, it is time that we had the opportunity to vote in presidential elections. It is not a strange or unique idea. As has been said, in multiple other countries around the world, including some in Europe, such as France and Poland, non-resident citizens — that is, citizens of the state who are not resident in the precise jurisdiction — are able to vote in presidential elections.”
“In 2025, it is time to give fuller meaning and expression to what, 27 years ago, were new clauses in the Irish constitution. Extending the right to participate in presidential elections to people resident in the North is an entirely sensible and legitimate expression of new articles 2 and 3. Although I and my party are strongly in favour of a new and united Ireland — an Ireland without an international border — that is based on reconciliation, pluralism and uniting the island's people, you do not have to believe in that vision to support or be sympathetic to the motion. It does not prejudge the outcome of any future referendum, even if my view is completely prejudged. <BR /> <BR />This place, Northern Ireland, is part of the island of Ireland.”
“That relates to nationhood and identity. Paula Bradshaw covered the fact that subsequent court cases have clarified that that can be understood to mean citizenship, which is part of the reason why people in Northern Ireland, including many people from non-traditional unionist backgrounds, non-traditional nationalist backgrounds and unionist backgrounds, are applying for Irish passports. Indeed, I have a healthy trade in my office in signing those forms. <BR /> <BR />The new article 3 from 1998 states:”
“I speak in strong support of the motion and welcome the fact that Sinn Féin Members have tabled it. It is an extremely important subject, on which it is entirely legitimate that the Assembly gets a chance to make its voice heard. While we disagree with Sinn Féin on some things, I strongly agree with the motion, and I am glad that we are debating it today. In answer to Mr Brett's question, I do not care what the origin is of the Bill that has been mooted in the Dáil; I care about the meat and substance of the issue. <BR /> <BR />In 1998, articles 2 and 3 of the constitution of Ireland, Bunreacht na hÉireann, were replaced — something for which, it is important to say, political unionism had called for decades — with new language, which I will briefly summarise. The replacement article 2 states:”
“Minister, you set out your views on NI Water and SORPI. However, you have also said that you want to give the Infrastructure Minister and her predecessor time and space to come up with a funding solution. They have had time and space, and there is no funding solution. Heads appear to be stuck in the sand. What pressure are you bringing to bear on the Infrastructure Minister to come up with a plan to invest in NI Water? The situation is getting worse, and our water is in crisis. What pressure are you bringing to bear on your ministerial colleague?”
“Furthermore, the Bill contains provisions that are emotive by their very nature, so we will have to consider them with sensitivity. As per normal procedure, the Committee will undertake a call for evidence on the provisions of the Bill, and we will shortly discuss the Bill timetable. <BR /> <BR />The Committee supports the motion to extend the regulations as per the Minister's remarks today. <BR /> <BR />In a party capacity, I will say that we welcome the fact that, although slightly later than we had all wanted, the Bill has been brought before the Assembly and, indeed, the Committee. The Committee looks forward to scrutinising it in detail.”