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“Clearly, however, the regulatory and enforcement regime for all those watercourses and marine environments is way out of date ecologically and, indeed, economically.”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 66 of 119.
“It is a central and critical part of the legitimate work of journalism, and, as I said, journalism is fundamental to upholding a free, democratic society. All too often in this society, journalism, as with other democratic norms, has been compromised. We know that Reporters without Borders and others cite Northern Ireland as one of the most dangerous places in Europe to be a journalist. We know that we have a litigation regime that is very often used to silence public-interest journalism. We also know that, in the past and in the not-so-distant past, paramilitary organisations and other organised crime gangs have used the threat of violence against journalists. There is a context in this society that is important to acknowledge, and that is that we have not been a exemplar in upholding free journalism.”
“In that case, police were investigating Barry and Trevor's sourcing for their 2017 documentary on the Loughinisland massacre, in which six people were killed, and for which nobody was ever charged. It is the most bitter irony that the police arrested those two journalists while the alleged killers in the Loughinisland massacre, who were named in the documentary, remain at large. <BR /> <BR />Barry and Trevor were doing a job that the criminal justice system had failed to do. They were providing a measure of public accountability for the Loughinisland victims and survivors and their families. To do that, they used the most basic, fundamental tool of journalism: sources. The use and protection of sources is not some sinister trick that journalists use to vex public authorities or, indeed, to annoy politicians like us.”
“In many ways, it should be difficult to be shocked in this place. Nevertheless, for many of us, it was genuinely shocking when we learned last year — nearly a year ago — about the surveillance of the phone of Barry McCaffrey, an award-winning journalist. Barry McCaffrey only found out that his phone was being eavesdropped upon when he made a complaint to the investigatory powers tribunal about a separate, later incident. That later incident — the chronology here becomes somewhat complicated, and I will not go through it all in minute detail — was, of course, the wholly inappropriate 2018 arrest of Barry and fellow journalist and filmmaker Trevor Birney and the searches of their homes.”
“The matter that we debate first in the SDLP's fourth Opposition day is about exactly that: the compromising, the undermining and the hounding of a free press, which is the cornerstone of any normal democratic society.”
“I am glad, Mr Speaker, that you mentioned the Contempt of Court Act and the ongoing investigation by the investigatory powers tribunal. In having the debate, it is important that we are careful about some of what we say but also robust in standing for a free press, which is the cornerstone of a democratic society and has all too often in Northern Ireland in the past and today been undermined routinely and structurally.”
“When he makes a winding-up speech and in any further debates on the Bill in the weeks to come, I look forward to hearing any more detail that he has. Of course, it is important that there be continued scrutiny of that area, including of the broader consequences of the Bill. The Communities Committee will be well placed to do that, but my Committee will also look at building regulations and its responsibilities in that area. Otherwise, thank you very much. I look forward to the Bill's passing and to further scrutiny.”
“Thankfully, that has not involved loss of life, but it has been traumatic and devastating for a large number of people, particularly in the county of Donegal. However, as my colleague Daniel McCrossan said, it probably goes beyond the county of Donegal. <BR /> <BR />The Bill is clearly a start in bringing us into line with the limitation legislation that was changed in England and Wales. It was something that was asked for, so I welcome the fact that Ministers have acted on it. However, clearly, as I said, it would have been preferable had we had longer to debate it. There were particular circumstances in which politicians, including me, were calling for speedy action, so I welcome the fact that the Minister has introduced the Bill in the House.”
“I do not know whether amendments will be tabled, but, obviously, it will be important that the Communities Committee and, indeed, other Committees, including the Committee that I chair — the Finance Committee — are able to look at any further measures that need to be taken in the area of building regulations and, indeed, remedial action, where there are problems. <BR /> <BR />As my colleague Daniel McCrossan said very forcefully, in two different contexts, on these islands, over the past number of years, we have seen clearly what happens when building regulations go terribly wrong. Obviously, there were the shocking events at Grenfell. I was still living in London when Grenfell happened, and I remember all too well the shock in that city when that happened. There has also been a different kind of scandal: the mica scandal.”
“I also acknowledge that, as others said in the previous debate, it is never a desirable situation for any legislation to happen via accelerated passage. That is very much the case. There is, however, a particular set of circumstances in this instance, and, obviously, there are people who, for very clear legal reasons, have an interest in the Bill. That is not putting words in anyone else's mouth. For people who hope to be able to avail themselves of the provisions of the Bill, it is clearly important that it passes speedily. <BR /> <BR />It is a relatively short Bill that brings us into line with, as has been said, England and Wales. Obviously, if any amendments are tabled in the next couple of days, it will be important that they are scrutinised and looked at.”
“The other is the Minister of Finance, who has responsibility for building regulations and who also took action to waive rates bills and ensure that those homeowners were not going to face rates bills like the rates bills that they had faced over the years when the properties had been totally uninhabitable and, indeed, when people were not legally able to inhabit those properties or rent them out. I welcome that action by those Ministers and the action by the Minister for Communities in bringing forward the legislation. <BR /> <BR />We have always said that, in our role of opposition, we will seek to be constructive and acknowledge where Ministers act swiftly, and I think that the Minister has done that in this situation.”
“<BR /> <BR />I had pressed and asked that Executive Ministers pay urgent attention to this issue and to the fact that, unlike homeowners of defective premises in England and Wales and, indeed, other parts of these islands, homeowners at Victoria Square were facing a legal situation — others were in a similar position — whereby time had lapsed and they had no legal recourse. That was clearly an unacceptable position, so I welcome the fact that the Minister acted swiftly with his colleagues in other Departments. One is the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, led by Minister Muir, whose Department previously, technically, had responsibility for this.”
“Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I was quick on my feet there, and apologies to my colleague Mr McCrossan for having to stand up before the end of his remarks. <BR /> <BR />I will speak very briefly, because I have a particular constituency interest in this legislation. What brought this issue to the public fore was events at Victoria Square, which is a very prominent building right in the middle of Belfast. It is in my South Belfast constituency, just at the northern edge of the now Belfast South and Mid Down Westminster constituency. It is also an extremely important commercial site for the city of Belfast and our whole region.”
“I welcome the new Health Minister to his role. I welcome the fact that he said in his statement that his ambition is "for better outcomes". What conversations has he had and what outcomes will he seek to place in a Programme for Government that will be not just aspirational but specific and clear about getting waiting lists down and all the other measurable improvements that we want to see in the health service?”
“Given that, over the past weeks and months, newspapers have been receiving letters telling them not to report the names of deceased offenders who have already been named in civil proceedings, can you today be clear that you will not attempt to appeal the decision? Any attempt to appeal it would, I am afraid, double down on bad law and be a waste of public money.”
“Minister, while the intentions may have been good, it is important to recognise that this has been terrible law. Mr Justice Humphreys, in his judgement, was clear and damning. He said:”
“Minister, three months ago, the Assembly debated a motion that called for many of the actions that you are now talking about. Can you be specific? You said that the consultation will be launched, hopefully, before recess. Can you give a timeline for when you want the guidance to be put into statute? Will it be by the end of this year or the end of the mandate? When, precisely?”
“Minister, it is good to have you back. I agree that we do not want to see any extra burdens on our hard-pressed students. It is also the case that we export an entire university's worth of young people from these shores every year. Many of them want to go, but too many do not want to go, and they do not come back. It is a structural problem in our economy. We have heard a lot about task forces and study groups, but will there be specific actions in the Programme for Government (PFG) on how we will increase student places in our society? Will that be in the PFG?”
“Minister, I welcome the statement. I note that, on educational underachievement, the pilot cooperation programme is due to begin in 2024 and 2025 with €24 million from the Irish Government's Shared Island unit and that further details will be provided in due course. With respect, we are in 2024 already. When do you expect to be able to come forward with more detail on how that will be deployed on a cross-border basis and how schools on the northern side of the border and, indeed, the sector can engage with that fund?”
“I am grateful to the Minister for that update and for being so thorough in going through the points raised, although she has had a fair bit of time to do it. Has her Department been in touch directly with UEFA, or will she consider getting in touch with UEFA, to find out the parameters and timing, so that the Department of Finance and the Finance Minister have absolute clarity on when the money needs to be committed?”
“If the Budget were voted down today — I do not think that it will be — that would not prevent the Minister from spending the money. There has been political agreement on the priorities, such as they are, but this is not a Budget Bill. It does not affect the legality of spending.”
“As a former civil servant, I acknowledge that there is a pre-election period. Obviously, I do not want the First Minister or deputy First Minister to stray into political territory with official resources, so that is fine. When the Programme for Government is published, however, will it include provision for an Irish language commissioner and associated commissioners? Will we have that clarity when the Programme for Government is published?”
“First Minister, will you confirm whether WhatsApp is still being used to do government business? If so, are you sharing a record in real time with civil servants so that they can keep that record and it cannot be deleted?”
“— COVID inquiry was not able to get hold of key evidence because it was deleted from digital devices.”
“First Minister, after the renewable heat incentive (RHI) inquiry report was published in March 2020, just as the COVID pandemic was spreading, you said:”
“The Member will be aware that the SDLP produced a proposal on the two-child limit that had a specific costing. <BR /> <BR />Since the Member has given way, I ask him this: does he think that the cycle of collapse and resignations is helped by a Justice Minister who, three months in, wants to resign her post?”
“The Opposition will be voting against it.”
“We should be setting priorities and delivering on them for the people of Northern Ireland, and I am afraid that this Budget does not do so.”
“Ministers who took the Pledge of Office just a few short months ago have spent the time since telling us how difficult public services are to run, about the fact that they are near or beyond collapse and about the fact that they are in a genuinely parlous state and that Ministers do not have enough money to improve them. The public expected those Ministers to be in office to implement this Budget and to be working hard on a Programme for Government. Instead, at the last count, more than 10% or 20% of the Executive are scurrying off to run for election. That, I am afraid, is the wrong priority, and the priorities in the Budget are the wrong ones.”
“It is not enough simply to allocate money that has been granted by the Treasury, even if, as I acknowledge, the money coming is not enough of a financial settlement and austerity has had a pernicious effect on our public services. It is not enough simply to pass on those allocations and expect to be patted on the back by the public. The public expect real prioritisation and real choices. They also expect us to do our jobs. They did not expect miracles; they expected a plan. They have not got a plan.”
“In her opening remarks, the Minister said that the people who stand up in the Chamber and suggest areas where money can be spent rarely provide solutions for where that money can be raised: that is a reasonable point. In our Opposition motions, we have consistently said where we would raise the money, and we did so in relation to ending the two-child limit. Presumably, the Minister would include Sinn Féin, DUP, Ulster Unionist and Alliance MLAs in that observation, because all those parties have tabled motions in the Chamber — motion after motion — promising action on everything, as I said, from Lough Neagh to holiday hunger to waiting lists but without specificity on how it will be paid for. <BR /> <BR />The public did not expect miracles, but they did expect a plan. This Budget is not a plan. It is not enough simply to be here.”
“We do not know about school buildings for integrated schools, which were promised funding but had it removed from them by the Executive. Despite some of the evasions that have come about on that money, Executive parties made those decisions: a ring fence was removed, and they then hastily called up the integrated schools affected and told them that they would not be getting the money. It would be helpful to have clarity on those points. <BR /> <BR />I agree with the Finance Minister that it is welcome that we are debating the Budget, despite its limitations, before the recess. I acknowledge that, but I say sincerely that the Budget is only as good as the statement of priorities that it contains, and it does not contain a serious statement of priorities.”
“I challenge the Minister to commit that if, in the months ahead, a new UK Government produce a comprehensive spending review (CSR), she will come back as soon as possible to the Chamber with a multi-year Budget and that it will be aligned to the Programme for Government that we have been promised by the First Minister and the deputy First Minister. <BR /> <BR />We need a multi-year Budget. We need a Programme for Government. We need a proper, strategic set of priorities. We have not got them yet, nor do we have clarity on some important priorities. We do not yet know how Casement Park, which is critical to delivering what could be a genuinely transformative international sporting spectacle for the city of Belfast and the whole region, will be paid for; we have no idea. It would have been helpful to have some clarity on that.”
“The fiscal framework in and of itself is welcome, but I want to wind back to what was said when the Executive financial restoration package happened. There were fevered denials from some Executive parties that they had agreed to any revenue raising; well, in plain black and white, in the new fiscal framework, there is a commitment to look at revenue raising. It would have been helpful if the Executive parties and Ministers had been upfront from the beginning with the public on that. <BR /> <BR />There is also an additional £24 million. Of course, I welcome that, to the extent that it was ever really in doubt, which is debatable. I also welcome and want to be constructive in acknowledging the fact that the Minister has said that, in the June monitoring round, she will allocate the money that has been indicated by the UK Government.”
“Well, we have not seen any of those long-term strategic decisions. The public in Northern Ireland have a right to expect them, given that, for most of the past decade, the institutions have been down. Indeed, for the two years or 18 months that followed the 2022 Assembly election, the Executive parties were meeting in private to discuss priorities and a Programme for Government. Not only do we not have a Programme for Government; we do not even have a strategically focused Budget. <BR /> <BR />I will come on to some of the details in the Budget. There are, of course, specific allocations that we welcome. We have acknowledged the progress that the Finance Minister has made on the fiscal framework.”
“— there is a typo; it should say "innovation and efficiency" —”
“I am not sure that too many people would disagree with that, but we have not yet seen any firm substance or clear statement of intent on any of those things. The Minister goes on to say:”
“I commend the work that the Finance Minister has done to engage with the UK Government and the Treasury in that regard. There is no reason, however, why the Budget statement could not have been a more strategic and forward-looking set of priorities for how the Executive were going to go about making decisions on the allocations that they wish to make over the next three years, what they wish to prioritise and, by extension, what they are not prioritising. We have not had that yet, and the public were entitled to expect it. <BR /> <BR />Turning to the document, there is a foreword from the Minister that sets out a difficult context. It says:”
“As I said, of course, two Ministers will not be here should they be successful in the election. <BR /> <BR />Today's Budget statement is not a statement of strategic priorities. Given the now dozens of motions that have been passed, particularly by Executive parties, promising action on everything from Lough Neagh to holiday hunger, waiting lists and a range of other things, we would expect to have seen a statement of strategic priorities. We are not seeing that in this document. No one expected miracles, but they did expect a plan for how we will rescue public services or, at least, a broad statement of priorities matched to Budget lines. <BR /> <BR />First, as we in the Opposition have said consistently, I acknowledge that we are not in a position that any of us would seek in terms of our allocations from the UK Government.”
“At the core of government is taking responsibility, and it is frustrating for the people of Northern Ireland that some of us who were elected to take responsibility and then were trusted with ministerial office have already indicated that they will step down or will step down should they be successful. <BR /> <BR />We have passed Budget Bills and Supply resolutions, which are simply legal authorisations of spending, but the Budget statement is supposed to be a statement of priorities, of strategic intent and of the choices that the Executive wish to make to improve public services and make lives better for the people of Northern Ireland, the people whom we have collectively let down for most of the past decade by not being here. Being here is not enough. Simply marking time or seeking credit for being here is not enough.”
“Before I begin my remarks, I thank the Deputy Chair of the Finance Committee, who will step into the breach. I had two statutory roles to perform today, and it would have been difficult to do full justice to both, given my role as leader of the Opposition. I thank the Deputy Chair for doing that. <BR /> <BR />It is good news that we finally have a Budget to debate. Here it is: the 2024-25 Budget. This is the first time in two or three years that we have had a Budget to debate and vote on. It happens in unique circumstances, because not only were the institutions restored three and a half months ago, but we have a UK general election coming up for which two Ministers in the Executive formed just a few months ago to restore devolution and rescue our collapsed public services have indicated that they will step down.”
“— certain Executive Ministers are not standing by that.”
“However, when leaders who have carved out a niche, including, it has to be said, the leader of the Alliance Party, in calling out others for walking away from devolution at the first opportunity walk away or seek to walk away from devolution, that, I am afraid, has to be called out. We can all play party political games, but, when we came back here in February, we said that our priority was public services. It is a shame that —”
“<BR /> <BR />We wonder why people distrust politics. We wonder why people have contempt for Stormont. Then, the Health Minister, with the NHS among the worst health services in western Europe, resigns, as we found out, at midnight tonight, and the Justice Minister, days after telling us of the parlous state of our justice system, says that she will resign to run for a Back-Bench position. <BR /> <BR />My party will always acknowledge the importance of Westminster. We hope to send as many SDLP MPs back as possible to stand up for this place and, hopefully, get rid of the Tory regime.”
“All of the parties that entered into the Executive and, indeed, the Opposition have acknowledged the parlous state of our finances and our public services. The public, in that context, rightly and understandably expected their politicians at a devolved level to be 100% focused on dealing with those issues, particularly those who were fortunate enough to take up ministerial office and sign the Pledge of Office. Therefore, it is profoundly disappointing, to say the least, that, in the past few days, after the election was called, we have found out that at least two Executive Ministers will run for office. Three and a half months into the Executive's being restored, with our public finances in a state of utter collapse and our public services in ruin, Ministers who solemnly took the Pledge of Office are running to leave office.”
“Mr Speaker, I welcome you back to the Chair, as Mr Brett did. I also associate myself with the remarks that were made about the abhorrent and appalling actions of the Netanyahu regime in Rafah over the past few days and endorse what was said about Palestinian statehood and Ireland recognising it. That is a huge step forward, but, sadly, it is not enough at the minute for the innocent people cowering in Gaza. <BR /> <BR />We know that the public of Northern Ireland do not think very much of this institution, and they do not think very much of politics or politicians here in general. We have been back in the Chamber and around the Executive table for less than four months. In that time, we have debated motion after motion, most of which have acknowledged the collapsing state of our public services.”
“What is the plan for the working-class communities in particular who availed themselves of courses at that campus? Inclusion is vital, but it is also about producing a pipeline of skilled workers, whether they go into cyber technologies or into the creative industries. As I say, there is real concern about this, particularly in that part of Belfast but also in the FE sector more broadly, so we are keen to hear from the Minister about the Department's view.”
“That has not yet been given, which has contributed to a real sense of a lack of communication and of frustration on the part of people who care about education provision — not just education provision but opportunities and the ability to create a skills pipeline into the, in many cases, world-leading businesses that David Brooks mentioned — in that part of Belfast. <BR /> <BR />I look forward to hearing from the Minister the Department's position, its view on the future sustainability of Belfast Met overall and whether simply closing Castlereagh campus is an unavoidable outcome. I would like to hear whether alternatives have been considered. If that is the route to be followed, has it been stress-tested, and have alternatives been exhausted?”
“While I acknowledge that the leaders at Castlereagh campus face real budgetary pressures and that they at least have to consider taking difficult decisions — the formal consultation period, to which I and others responded and made our views known, ended in February — the bare minimum that could be done is to pursue absolutely every avenue in order to avoid the blunt instrument route of closure and to give to those who care about further education provision in that part of south-east Belfast the most thorough explanation possible of the alternatives.”
“It is therefore vital that, at a bare minimum, Belfast Met and, by extension, the Minister and the Department be obliged to give an account of why simply taking all that provision out of south-east Belfast will improve FE provision in the city overall and how that connects to the economic vision that the Minister has set out and to our broader determination to improve and upskill our economy and create opportunity in working-class communities in particular. <BR /> <BR />Those are real questions that the people who are engaged in this, who are studying or employed at Belfast Met or are involved in the wider community, are asking, and I am afraid that they have not been answered yet.”
“As has been said, some of those trades have left the campus and are now pursued in other parts of the Belfast Met estate. Whether that was the right decision is debatable, but there is real frustration that some of those specialisms left Castlereagh. <BR /> <BR />It is important to say — it will come as a surprise to people who have perceived the Castlereagh campus to be a more traditional further education site — that it is an island- and Ireland-leading campus in its tech provision.”