Alex Attwood
West Belfast · Social Democratic and Labour Party · Northern Ireland
“I certainly do not take away from the contribution being made by the judiciary in Northern Ireland to framing a society that upholds the right principles and applies human rights standards across the board without fear or favour. <BR /> <BR />There are two issues with bail. One is police bail, which nobody has commented on so far.”
“Whatever it is, it is a flip-flop. It is trying to cover your tracks. It is having said to people that everything was all right when things were not all right. People saw through it.”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. When I was housing Minister in 2010-11, I conducted a fundamental review of the Housing Executive. It was based upon a number of principles, including protecting the institution of the Housing Executive, its legacy and name.”
“What world have you been living in for the last two or three months? <BR /> <BR />That is why Mr Agnew is right to say that there will be anger. There will be anger at the DUP on the day that a public inquiry is established into RHI, belatedly endorsed by Sinn Féin because it had no place else to turn.”
“He accepted a point from me and then said, "Well, actually, since that time the then deputy First Minister has been looking at the matter." Is it not curious that 18 months ago, despite NAMA, despite Red Sky, despite ransom strips — and, for all we know, people might have even known about RHI then — Sinn Féin, despite all that evidence, s…”
“Sorry, apologies. <BR /> <BR />I agree completely with Mr Agnew who said, in his opening remarks, that there was a need for an independent open process to investigate ministerial conduct, not least given recent events, and that there will be public anger if the motion is not passed.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,562 lines we hold for Alex Attwood, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 30 of 32.
“<BR /> <BR />If I were Gary Hart, the British Government, the Irish Government, or some of the parties in the talks at the moment — I say "some of the parties" because recent words by some of them give me no confidence about where we are going — I would have little confidence, as we go into this pivotal week in the talks process, in what is said in a document that Sinn Féin put into the talks process. It states:”
“During this debate in this Chamber, will you correct the public record and the Assembly record and withdraw the allegation about the character of Paul Quinn and the good name of the Quinn family? Are you prepared to stand on your feet, three minutes into my speech, at 5.10 pm, and say that to everybody who is in the Chamber at this time? Otherwise, what you and Mr Boylan have been doing in your speeches is what you did in the Chamber when faced with another victim and survivor who sat up in that Public Gallery: you again denied the truth. You resist justice, fight against accountability and face down the people whom the debate is about — the victims and survivors, wherever they might be in this society.”
“If Sinn Féin has no information about the murder of Paul Quinn, why did his colleague come into the Chamber and, on the record in Hansard, say that the murder of Paul Quinn was the result of a dispute between criminal gangs? Can Mr Sheehan explain why, if Sinn Féin now claims that it has no information about the murder, Conor Murphy made that comment? Can you explain it to me, to the people in the Public Gallery or to anybody in any county on the island of Ireland? Can you explain that? <BR /> <BR />If you are not willing now to stand on your feet and explain that comment, will you now stand on your feet and answer the question put to you and your colleagues by Mr Bradley?”
“<BR /> <BR />Mr Sheehan said that he would not want to do anything to deepen the "sense of hurt" of the family of Paul Quinn, yet his entire speech was littered with further attempts to hurt victims and survivors by portraying what they and those who stand in solidarity with them are doing as other than an effort to get to the truth and have accountability. Mr Sheehan said:”
“First of all, I apologise on behalf of Dolores Kelly, who is meant to be speaking now. She is unwell. Even though she is not here, I have some sense of what she might have said. The first thing is to again acknowledge the strength, dignity and resilience of victims and survivors, who regularly speak forth of their search for truth, justice and accountability. <BR /> <BR />In my view, it is the victims and survivors who, unlike some in the Chamber, are again demonstrating the best standards for people on this island. My colleague said earlier that Paul Quinn, whilst he went to his death that night, has not been silent since. The voices that have been speaking up, in particular those of his mother and his father, are in stark contrast to the voices that we heard from my right earlier today.”
“Based on the statements from Sinn Féin and others since the 'Spotlight' programme, you have to conclude that, if an abuser, at that time, was given additional responsibilities and given all that has come to pass since, it has not yet registered with Sinn Féin. <BR /> <BR />This is the latest chapter of abuse on this island, and it revolves around Maíria Cahill. I fear that there are more terrible chapters in the story of abuse to come. On behalf of Maíria Cahill and all the Maíria Cahills — there may be many, many others — her words are the most fearless and enduring. Her work in speaking truth to power tells us all that we need to hear. She says:”
“That was 1999, which was around the time when the IRA was carrying out its first inquiry and interrogation of Maíria Cahill. Shortly thereafter, Maíria Cahill met Gerry Adams, and the IRA ended its inquiry in March 2000. Three months later, the man who Gerry Adams and other people say abused Maíria Cahill was promoted to a post in Community Restorative Justice Ireland in west Belfast. He was given that post, which was published, publicised and promoted in Sinn Féin's newspaper, 'An Phoblacht', where people were advised that the person who abused Maíria Cahill was now working on domestic abuse. If there was ever a moment that proved a point about the culture that prevailed in that organisation at that time, that was it.”
“Do you believe that that is living up to the standards of transparency and accountability that Mr Adams articulated in this place in the Ryan debate in 2009? <BR /> <BR />There is a third question when it comes to transparency and accountability. In 1999, Gerry Adams told his ard fheis:”
“Given that that is her testimony, which has been repeated in many places over the last three weeks and privately many times before that, how can Mr Gerry Adams, the leader of the Provisional movement and the president of Sinn Féin, who says that he believes that Maíria Cahill was abused, say, not last year or last month but yesterday, to the people of Ireland in answer to the question, "Do you accept that Maíria Cahill was forced by the IRA to face her attacker?", "I don't know. That's the truth of it"? The question to Mr Adams, to Ms Ní Chuilín and to Ms McCann is: do they agree with Mr Adams's response to the question that she was forced by the IRA to face her attacker, which was, "I don't know. That's the truth of it".”
“My question to Mr Adams, to Ms Ní Chuilín and to Jennifer McCann is this: is your answer to the question, "Where were abusers expelled to?" the same as Garry Adams's, which was, "I don't know is the direct answer"? That is unacceptable and is unacceptable to Irish democracy. <BR /> <BR />Later in the same interview, Mr Adams was asked, "Do you accept that Maíria Cahill was forced by the IRA to face her attacker?", to which Mr Adams replied, "I don't know. That's the truth of it". Maíria Cahill says that not only was she forced to face her attacker but she states:”
“Accountability and transparency were the standard that the president of Sinn Féin said should govern these issues that face Irish society. Fast-forward not 10 years, 10 months or even 10 days ago: fast-forward to an interview that Mr Adams gave on Irish radio yesterday morning. He was asked, "Where were abusers expelled to?" to which he replied, "'I don't know' is the direct answer to your question". Here we are in the eye of this storm, and the president of Sinn Féin when asked where abusers were expelled to replied, "'I don't know' is the direct answer to your question". We need to know where they were expelled to in order to assess the risk to people in this part of Ireland, across Ireland and on these islands in order to determine where they are and the level of risk.”
“Those who seek to diminish her with viciousness in social media or through the releases of a Belfast lawyer must not prevail. <BR /> <BR />In this Chamber in November 2009, Gerry Adams said in respect of the Ryan report just published in Dublin:”
“<BR /> <BR />Let us also remember that, in the last few hours, another of the disappeared has been identified. That is another example of the culture of abuse and death and cover-up and lack of accountability. Whatever comes from the debate, let us recognise that it is only about speaking for victims and survivors and speaking up for truth and accountability. <BR /> <BR />Maíria Cahill is the latest Irishwoman who speaks truth to power. She follows in the footsteps of Catherine McCartney and her sisters, of Margaret McGuckin and those other children abused in institutions. Maíria Cahill, despite the trauma of her experience and despite those who still seek to traumatise her, continues to speak truth to power. She is a fearless, resilient, formidable woman. Irish democracy in all its expressions should stand with her.”
“We must always remember what the debate is about and what it is only about: abuse, cover-up and accountability. Whatever attempts have been made to obscure, dissemble, unpick and deny those facts, the debate remains about abuse, cover-up and accountability. It was only a few weeks ago that the Chamber unanimously passed a motion in respect of the abuse at Kincora. What was the response of the British Government? In denying our unanimous request to have Kincora part of the abuse inquiry in London, the Secretary of State said that it should remain part of the Hart inquiry in Northern Ireland and said that there would be the "fullest possible degree of cooperation" by all of Her Majesty's Government and its agencies to determine the facts. That is code for resistance to truth and accountability.”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. I note his comment that he is trying to assess as quickly as possible the number of people who may be disadvantaged by the end of the scheme for new entrants. Can I take it from that that, for example, since you met the Committee informally in relation to this matter, you or your officials have had ongoing contact, conversations and meetings with Employers For Childcare, which, as everybody including you acknowledges, is one of the leading authorities in respect of all this? Since the informal meeting, have you had ongoing, active meetings to assess the level of disadvantage?”
“However, as the Ministers know, I and other members of the Committee have been quite persistent in trying to tie down who will lose out on the far side of the new arrangements and to see if we can create mechanisms to accommodate those who will lose out in the new order of things. As we take forward a childcare strategy, we have to cover all bases. This debate is about how best we can cover that particular base.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Minister indicated that the money that might be available per child per year was up to £2,000. Is it not the case, Minister, that the average that might be available per child per year is £600? Treasury might want to present the figure of £2,000 per child per year for headline grabbing, but, if I recall correctly, the reality is that, when it works itself through, the figure will be £600 per child per year. <BR /> <BR />I conclude by recognising that the legislative consent motion creates greater opportunities for a larger number of people to access childcare support. That is recognised, and therefore it is not appropriate to divide the House on the matter.”
“The third sector says that some authorities in London are indicating privately that, if it is the wish of the Northern Ireland Executive to take forward a bespoke voucher scheme for families disadvantaged by the closure of the scheme in the autumn of 2015, that is in order. Have there been conversations with the relevant authorities in Britain to get headline approval for a bespoke scheme in the event that that happens? <BR /> <BR />The third issue is that there are unspent moneys in the childcare strategy. There will be difficult choices to be made on the right investment on the far side of the conclusion of the childcare strategy. However, even indicatively, is a budget line being provided for what might or might not be required for a bespoke voucher scheme in the event of that being the direction that the Executive and Assembly choose?”
“In doing so, we could make a judgement about whether that is the right place to invest childcare moneys compared with the other recommendations that might come forward as part of the overall childcare strategy. <BR /> <BR />The third question is this: as part of that, have there been further consultations with Treasury, HMRC or any other relevant authority to determine whether, if we came up with a bespoke scheme for people disadvantaged by the closure of the voucher scheme in 2015, it would have the Treasury, HMRC or other approvals necessary to ensure that a bespoke scheme could be delivered?”
“We could end up with a situation being accepted and agreed where a range of people are disadvantaged — I think that that will be the outcome of the scoping exercise — without there being a bespoke scheme on the books to be deployed by the end of next year, when the current scheme closes to new entrants. My second question to the junior Minister is this: is it not a wise course of action that, as part of the scoping exercise, you have a parallel process about a bespoke voucher scheme for people otherwise disadvantaged by the closure of the voucher scheme in 2015? Some indications are that it might be as few as 1,000 families. I am not going to second-guess the scoping exercise, but, if it is that number, is it beyond our capacity to come up with a bespoke scheme?”
“<BR /> <BR />Given that we are running out of time and that the voucher scheme concludes in the autumn of 2015, it seems that, in addition to the scoping exercise — the evidence from the external sector that I referred to says unambiguously that a number of people will be disadvantaged by the closure of the voucher scheme in the autumn of 2015 — good practice and good government require an exercise to be undertaken to determine, in the event that people are disadvantaged by the closure of the scheme, what a bespoke voucher scheme might look like as part of an overall childcare strategy.”
“If, tomorrow, we are to get a briefing from officials about what the childcare strategy proposals might be and given that the Minister has indicated that the childcare strategy in its final form will be published in 2015 — he might want to confirm when that is anticipated — it seems to be a very urgent piece of work for the scoping exercise to be conducted and concluded in good time so that, if a range of people is disadvantaged by the closure of the scheme next autumn and if it is deemed to be appropriate, provision is made for them in the childcare strategy due to be published in 2015. Who is being consulted? What timeline will the scoping exercise conclude within? Will all that converge, if necessary, with the publication of the final childcare strategy?”
“Given that he also said that a scoping exercise was to be undertaken for parents who may be disadvantaged by the ending of the voucher scheme in autumn 2015, can he confirm where precisely that scoping exercise is, who is conducting it and who is being consulted on the scoping of the scale of the individuals who may be disadvantaged by the ending of the voucher scheme?”
“As the Chair indicated, of the 4,500 people who responded, 63% struggled at some point in 2013 to meet their childcare costs; 46% reduced their working hours or even left work because of struggles with childcare costs; and nearly 50% were unsure whether they were claiming all that they were entitled to under the available childcare proposals. If that is the experience of so many of those who are trying to access childcare support and given that those real and daily struggles continue, we have to make sure that, in taking forward the consent motion, all bases are covered when it comes to ensuring that all available childcare options remain available in future. <BR /> <BR />Questions arise from that that the junior Minister may want to address in his reply. First, he indicated that the final childcare strategy would be published in 2015.”
“In one way, I have to declare an interest: I am a parent of young children aged five and eight years. Although my wife and I are both in work, with good salaries, I have some sense of parents' struggles in accessing affordable childcare and the multiple complications that arise from that. <BR /> <BR />I repeat what the Chair said: there was a survey of nearly 20% — a 20% response rate — of those in Northern Ireland who were claiming any form of financial support for the cost of childcare. Where have you ever come across a survey on any public policy issue to which 20% of the affected constituency took time to respond? A consequence of that is that the response must be as valid and compelling as any response to a public attitudes survey, if you like, on any issue.”
“The Committee Chair referred, for example, to the fact that there had been an informal gathering of representatives of the Committee and the junior Ministers and officials on the matter. That seemed to me to be a model of good practice in a situation in which we have difficulties getting Ministers to come to Committees, as the Chair indicated. Here was a model of better practice when it came to how a Committee interrogates a matter of public policy in an effort to get it right. All of that happened because of the work of the external organisations, which brought real evidence and clinical analysis to the issue of the childcare payments legislation.”
“Given that the Committee had been initially unsighted in relation to what was being proposed and, as a consequence, the limitations of what it could do, it was the efforts of external organisations such as Employers For Childcare, the FSB, Early Years and the family of childcare organisations that brought into sharp relief the opportunities of the new proposals as well as the deficits in the new legislation coming from Westminster. Indeed, my observation of what those organisations did on the legislative consent motion and the issues around it is that it was a case study of how a group of external organisations could powerfully influence the view of government and a Committee.”
“Thank you for calling me a second time. <BR /> <BR />I agree with the Chair of the Committee's comments in acknowledging the contribution, input, efforts, campaign and lobbying of relevant organisations in the third sector.”
“I welcome that answer, as far as it went. I welcome the fact that there will be meetings, but when will you be able to say what the Arts Council and all the other funding bodies will have in hard cash as their budget line or baseline for next year? Will it be in a month? Will it be in two months? I note, of course, that it is all subject to the approval of the Budget by the House in March.”
“John Dallat as Speaker would represent something and someone different.”
“<BR /> <BR />John Dallat has been a political representative for 37 years. There are people in the Chamber who have not been on this earth for 37 years. Over that time, he has shown insight, wisdom, intellect and judgement. We again say to people before they cast their vote in the next matter of minutes, think again about what John Dallat would represent for politics and for the Assembly. <BR /> <BR />The SDLP also recognises that there will be a watershed moment in the event that Mitchel McLaughlin is elected Speaker. We will first vote for Mitchel McLaughlin, but we believe that, if that does not prevail, the election of John Dallat should prevail. For too long, issue after issue in the Assembly and in Northern Ireland has been reduced to narrow deals. It has been about the division of spoils rather than the full public interest.”
“I wish former Speaker William Hay the best. At times, I had differences with the former Speaker, one of which was of a fundamental nature, but I wish him a full recovery and hope that he has a full role in the House of Lords in the fullness of time. <BR /> <BR />The election of the Speaker today can be a watershed moment. We should measure the next 10 minutes against whether or not it is a watershed moment for the Assembly and for politics. A number of candidates have been nominated, all of whom have their particular values and virtues, but, in the view of the SDLP, more than any other candidate, the election of John Dallat as Speaker would represent that watershed moment. The election of John Dallat would be a renewal of integrity and a recognition of a good public servant.”
“— exact same call and ring-fence, in their budget, the allocations to the VSS?”
“<BR /> <BR />My final point is this: I ask the First Minister and deputy First Minister to explain how much has been put into corporate expenses and corporate costs of the VSS, and how much has gone into the lives of victims. I also ask the First Minister and deputy First Minister this: why have victims and survivors' moneys not been ring-fenced in the budget of OFMDFM? If the Health Minister makes that call and the Education Minister makes that call, why do the First Minister and deputy First Minister FM not make the —”
“It is to say to the British Government that, when it comes to special provision for those who have been severely disabled — the 550 people who lost limbs or eyes or were otherwise severely disabled — when it comes to welfare need because of the legacy of conflict and that we have increasing numbers of people presenting with trauma arising from the conflict, Northern Ireland is different when it comes to the issue of Budget negotiations. If they want to live up to supporting the needs of victims and survivors of the conflict in this negotiation, let them live up to it when it comes to Budget provision generally and welfare provision specifically. Let us make that a point of unanimity in the Chamber today and a point of argument when it comes to these negotiations.”
“<BR /> <BR />The chief executive of WAVE, Sandra McPeake, said recently, and it has been referred to earlier, that there was a 34% increase in victims and survivors contacting her organisation last year. She said that people as young as seven were contacting her organisation because the trauma of terror and state violence is passing into new generations. What is the consequence of that for us in living up to our responsibilities to victims and survivors?”
“What I have just said answers Mrs Kelly's question, which she rightly asks. <BR /> <BR />It was unfortunate that Mr Moutray tried to reduce the debate, on which we can have unanimity, to one about welfare cuts. However, given that he has raised it, can we take the point and be more constructive? What is the point? It is that one of the arguments that we have to employ with the British Government and which, in my view, was not deployed fully, was that, because of the needs of victims and survivors in the North and the needs of our public generally, arising from state violence and the violence of terror organisations, our profile is very different.”
“The Haass proposals on dealing with the past ask hard questions that require hard answers from those who were in command and control of terror groups, on the one hand, and state agencies, on the other. In the view of the SDLP, during the next round of negotiations, they will seek to unpick the Haass threshold because it is too challenging and too demanding, and it asks too many questions of those who directed terror and state violence over the last 40 years. If we are to live up to the appeal of Damien McNally and many other victims and survivors, we must not allow Haass on the past to be unpicked in the way in which some will conspire to do.”
“Our answer to Damien and all the other victims and survivors is that, from here, we go into the negotiations with the British Government, and we put centre stage, among many other issues, the past and Kincora, and the past and victims and survivors arising from state violence and the violence of the terror organisations over the past 40 years. Let us at least agree to all of that. <BR /> <BR />One of the reasons that I put down that marker is this: mark my words, when we go into negotiations over the next while, there will be vested interests that will try to unpick Haass on the past, because the threshold of Haass on the past is far beyond what the vested interests of loyalist and republican organisations and state agencies are prepared to accept or tolerate.”
“Let us stop for a moment and think about this debate and the debate last week. There is actually a point of unanimity in the Chamber, and that is around dealing with the issues of victims and survivors. <BR /> <BR />Among many proposals that we will make, we propose that, if there is unanimity around Kincora and unanimity around this motion, that should be a point of agreement when we come to the talks that are about to commence over the next number of weeks. We should present to the British Government a united position when it comes to Kincora and the Victims and Survivors Service. We should do that because of the words in the media recently of Damien McNally, a survivor of trauma, who said:”
“I thank the Minister for his information so far. Given the welcome moneys that you announced last week in respect of barriers to early learning, could you confirm what discussions you have had with the Health Minister in relation to ensuring that, once a language acquisition problem has been identified, there are sufficient therapists in schools to respond to those in need?”
“Given that the biggest issues on the agenda appear to have been financial and economic matters, given the scale of organised crime on the island of Ireland and mindful that the biggest illegal waste dump ever in these islands is two miles outside Derry, and that those responsible have £50 million out of that criminality, will you and the First Minister approach the Dublin Government about having a conversation at the next NSMC meeting about the threat of organised crime and waste crime on the island of Ireland?”
“Check the record. Unlike in your time in the DOE, the profile of approvals for wind turbines, both commercial scale and farm-located, was far in excess of anything that you achieved. Where there were environmental consequences that were too grave in respect of energy plant, of course I refused it. Would any other position be responsible?”
“I think that the public record will say otherwise. If I am wrong, I will correct the record. However, I recall the Minister, on one of her investment trips, saying that if fracking was being done safely in another place it could be done safely here. <BR /> <BR />I am glad that there has been a change of heart. Whatever the motivation, whether it is the imminence of the Fermanagh Westminster election or whether it is a genuine change of heart, I welcome it, but do not confuse fracking that might relate to thermal with hydraulic fracking for gas, where there are health, safety, water and seismic consequences.”
“I note that comment, but, until last week, you might have drawn different conclusions from the current Minister's viewpoint. The Minister went to the Middle East — I think it was to Oman, but I might be corrected on that — and issued a statement saying that fracking was being done OK there, so why can we not do it in Fermanagh?”
“If the ROC was reduced to a level of 1·6, then, in a moment, the solar PV industry would be dealt a crushing blow. <BR /> <BR />Mr Frew is wrong: whether there is a frack-free model of thermal energy — Mr Agnew from the Green Party will talk about that, I am sure — you miss the point. The point is that, whether you frack or not using thermal, it is about whether you can do it safely and responsibly. The evidence in respect of hydraulic fracking is that it has not been done responsibly in America. The safety issues around where the gas goes and what the health impacts are —”
“As I always say, 30 miles from here, in Strangford lough, is the world birthplace of modern tidal power. The world birthplace of modern tidal power sits in one of the most protected waters in Europe. You can be imaginative, you can be world leading and you can do it in a way that protects the environment. That, in my view, is the real issue in the debate. Whatever about thermal energy mixing in with wind, wave, tide and solar, do we have the imagination, do we put the money in and do we have the capacity to live up to that challenge? That is why I ask the Minister, given the current consultation on the Northern Ireland renewable obligations certificate when it comes to solar PV, whether she has a view on reducing, as outlined in the consultation, the ROC payable in that regard from 4 to 1·6.”
“<BR /> <BR />Whatever about thermal energy, Mr Frew, as I have said many times before, the biggest economic opportunity this island has is not just in our wind but in our wave and tide. That is where science and engineering are at their most advanced stage, and that is where the biggest opportunities exist. If we are to compete in the global market, if we are to one day be energy sufficient, if we are to one day export to national and international grids, it is around wind, wave and tide that we will be able to first build that business model and that energy model. That needs imagination, and my concern about the shape of current government strategy is that there is not enough imagination to scale up in the way that we can. We have the imagination.”
“I make that point because, whatever the difference might be around whether there is frack-free thermal energy, the purpose of the debate should be whether we in Northern Ireland are going to recognise that our economy, if it is to be sustainable and thrive, has to have a niche market profile in the global conditions, one of which is what Terry Cross was talking about a couple of hours ago: whether the profile of our industry for recycling and renewables gives us a competitive advantage. I make that point because, whatever about thermal energy, unless we in Northern Ireland shape our energy mix and go down the road of renewables in a much speedier way, we will lose our space in the global market.”
“A couple of hours ago, the Minister, other people and I were in west Belfast to acknowledge the work of Delta Packaging. It now has 250 people supplying headline businesses in Europe and other places. Terry Cross, the chair of the board, made the point that his business model was beginning to address obviously the issue of recycling. I know from other conversations that his business model is trying to address the issue of renewables.”