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 6 of 32.
“On a point of order, Mr Speaker. The reason I am right is that that was a decision of the recent Business Committee, which Mr McCartney does not sit on. It is a matter of record that the new Business Committee voted — the DUP and Sinn Féin — to suppress the rights of smaller parties.”
“Would the Member be interested to know that, when other parties in the Business Committee tried to adjust speaking order so that the smaller parties would have speaking rights and be heard today, it was the DUP and Sinn Féin that voted down that proposal?”
“It was, of all people, Lord Hailsham, who, wherever he may be, will have a smile on his face, because he anticipated what we see happening in the sort of democracy that the DUP and Sinn Féin have imposed. He talked about "executive dominance" and an "elective dictatorship". We see the reality of that in the conduct of this debate and the practice of democracy as the DUP and Sinn Féin see it.”
“What an affront to those who have struggled for democracy to tell them that, if they go into opposition, they go into the darkness, and so do truth and public accountability. The message from the DUP and Sinn Féin — I will be very clear about it — is this: "We won, so we do". Whether it is on parties in the Chamber or on the people out there, whether it is in respect of Brexit, NAMA, Fresh Start, the Budget or legacy — that will come next — the DUP, Sinn Féin and the British Government will impose their will. They will impose it when it comes to legacy, just as they are trying to do in respect to all those other issues. <BR /> <BR />I do not think that I have ever quoted him, but I am going to quote him today. Forty years ago, somebody gave the Richard Dimbleby lecture.”
“Those were allegedly the standards of the DUP and Sinn Féin when it comes to NAMA. Yet, when they have an opportunity, through Steven Agnew's amendment, to support all efforts to uncover the truth and commit to full cooperation with all ongoing investigations, such as would happen if the commissioner for standards had that power, what do they do? They vote it down. Will they please explain? If they were so keen on those principles last week, why not this week? <BR /> <BR />The most astounding speech came, as is often the case, from Ms Little Pengelly. Consistent with all DUP Members who spoke today, she said that this is a consequence of going into opposition: "This is how government does its business, because you decide to go into opposition".”
“It is also ironic that people are trying to drive a coach and horses through the good work of the Housing Executive over 40 or 50 years. Yes, it lost its way in some ways, but that is no excuse for the DUP to drive a coach and horses through its good authority. <BR /> <BR />There is also an enormous inconsistency between this week and last week. Remember what the DUP and Sinn Féin voted through last week:”
“It is allegedly not in the DNA of Sinn Féin, yet today it will vote down a quite moderate measure that would see accountability in respect of the ministerial code. Why? I give way to the Member.”
“I will shortly. <BR /> <BR />The defining feature of the best practice of democracy, after the abuses of democracy in this part of Ireland, has been oversight and accountability across the full range of public policy. <BR /> <BR />We know that, year in and year out, the DUP resisted all that accountability and transparency. The question is why Sinn Féin, which tends to make an argument that it embraces these new models of accountability, has resisted Steven Agnew's amendment, which creates ministerial accountability in a way that we did not have before. I understand that it is in the DNA of the DUP to resist accountability because it has done it for decades.”
“If there is a defining feature of democracy and the best practice of democracy in this part of Ireland over the last 40 years, it is the fact that we have oversight and accountability. There was once a time when we did not have it on policing, so we had to go off and create it through Patten and the Policing Board. There was once a time that we did not have it on police complaints, so we had to go off and create the Police Ombudsman. There was once a time that we did not have it on housing and we had to create the Housing Executive, and so on and so forth.”
“I remind people what Mr Agnew's amendment states. It calls for:”
“The Pitchford inquiry deals with the activities of undercover officers. The Minister knows that a number of inquests that might touch on the activities of undercover security personnel are currently delayed in the High Court. Given that, is it not time for her, as Justice Minister, to advise the British Government that they should go ahead and release money to enable inquests to be handled and managed by the Courts and Tribunals Service and High Court judges in Northern Ireland rather than wait and wait for an Executive decision on the matter that is not coming?”
“I look to the Speaker: given the advances being made on the management of Bills that were referred to by members of Sinn Féin in particular, we must see progress being made on the management of Bills where there is more than one Member and more than one party wanting to co-sponsor a Bill in order to demonstrate to wider society that there can be ownership of policy in the Assembly across all or most of the parties in it —”
“I look to the NCA and the police to support Members in their commitment to the code of practice on the rule of law to deal with assets, including historical assets. <BR /> <BR />I will move on. I welcome the moderate progress being made on hybrid Bills, but progress needs to be made on the management of Bills, not least and in particular the equal marriage Bill and having ownership of that Bill in the name of more than one Member.”
“However, the NCA was sent chasing its tail when it came to new moneys to deal with organised crime in the North of Ireland. Whatever all that was about, it was not good enough because it interferes with the commitment of the parties and Members of the Assembly, in word and deed, to the rule of law. The NCA, in my view, was acting with one hand tied behind its back. I hope that, very quickly, the NCA will get additional funding in order to ensure that what we commit to in word in this new code is the reality when it comes to the life of our citizens in Northern Ireland. If not, people will again be chasing their tail when it comes to funding and strategies to deal with the enduring issue of organised crime in the North, not least the issue of assets, both current and historical.”
“I will bear it in mind, and I will bring my point to a close very quickly. On the last day of October 2015, the NCA was asked to put a bid in for work to do with the rule of law. It was, if you like, to help Northern Ireland society, and all of us, deal with the issues of the rule of law, including to ensure that we live up to the code that we are now subscribed to. The NCA was subsequently advised by the British Government to withdraw that bid. Over the summer, the new Secretary of State advised Colum Eastwood, the SDLP leader, that that letter from the head of the NCA, in October 2015, in which she asked for new moneys, was for illustrative purposes only. <BR /> <BR />The NCA's bid was to help Northern Ireland society deal with the rule of law and help us to live up to our commitments to the rule of law in this new code.”
“In that regard, the National Crime Agency was asked to bid. This is relevant to the work and to our obligations arising from the code. The National Crime Agency (NCA) —”
“Clearly, Mr Poots wants to hear me, which is a first, and I welcome that. I will not repeat what I have just said because I will cover it now anyway. The commitment entered into by Members is to uphold the rule of law "in word and deed", and it arises from Fresh Start. At the time of Fresh Start, we were one of the parties that circulated to other parties its papers dealing with criminality and paramilitarism. We did not hear of or see many papers from other parties, save from the Alliance Party, but we put forward very firm proposals about what that code should look like. To some degree, the new code reflects some of that thinking and, no doubt, the thinking of others. <BR /> <BR />Fresh Start also agreed new funding to deal with the issues of the rule of law in Northern Ireland.”
“Clearly, all three proposals are useful. Of course, the difference — the yawning gap — that could arise between what is on paper and what happens in deed is what should most preoccupy us. Let me give you one example: there is now a commitment on Members to uphold the rule of law "in word and deed", which comes from Fresh Start. Another element of Fresh Start was additional moneys.”
“Would the Minister agree to table a report in the Assembly Library outlining what the Department is doing, in a dedicated way, about the aquaculture and marine sector and the environment sector on the issues that are likely to arise from Brexit, and what remedies the Department is looking at for those matters?”
“I note what Mr Allister just said. That would guarantee special status and, potentially, special funding for Northern Ireland. We would be out of the European Union but would have a legally binding special status in respect of it.”
“I refer the Minister to paragraphs 4 to 8 of her statement, which deal with the INTERREG, LIFE and Horizon 2020 programmes and EU funding. Will the Minister indicate, hopefully by answering yes or no, whether she endorses today's proposal from the Irish Government — it has been endorsed previously by others — that, when it comes to Brexit negotiations, to safeguard the interests of people in Northern Ireland, including their access to all those funds, there should be a legally binding agreement about the special status of Northern Ireland post-Brexit? That would —”
“Recently in Kent, there was an effort to deploy legislation against wrong use: 94 vehicles were seized, and calls were reduced by three quarters.”
“I have one example, after which I will bring my remarks to a close —”
“There is a wide range of enforcement mechanisms and legislation, and I urge the police to deal with that.”
“We have discovered that in respect of all other sorts of vehicles and all other issues to do with road and land safety. It is my view that a new law will be required in order to try to manage the issue and mitigate the risk. <BR /> <BR />I concur with the views made on enforcement. There is a wide family of legislation already in existence, and — I note the comments made about police resources — there are a number of mechanisms available to the PSNI and other authorities enabling them to deal with the use of these vehicles. There is legislation for use without lawful authority; alarm, distress and nuisance; criminal damage; and supplying petrol to persons under the age of 16. There is also is an obligation on those who sell petrol to behave more responsibly when people come to their premises.”
“Interventions of that sort to issue warnings about what is or is not allowed and about the penalties for misuse will be important. <BR /> <BR />I agree with some of the comments made by Mr Beattie. Given the very heavy risk that exists and the consequences for too many families in this city and beyond, there should be exhortations to parents for them not to buy these sorts of vehicles for their children, not least over the next two or three months in the run-up to the Christmas season, and if they do buy them, they should put on constraints for responsible use. <BR /> <BR />If there is a need for a new law on the registration and marking of these sorts of vehicles when sold, the SDLP will endorse it. Our experience of people and vehicles generally suggests that there will be a need for legislative intervention.”
“It should be within the grasp of all of us, including government, to scale up multiple interventions to mitigate the risk of death and serious injury from the use of quad and other off-road mechanisms. That means trying to identify solutions to the problem that is clearly before us. <BR /> <BR />I will refer to some matters, some of which have been touched on already. I acknowledge the work of Belfast City Council and people involved in community safety, over the last number of weeks, in working up some — for want of a better term — management tools to deal with the use of these vehicles. As referred to by Ms McCann, there are proposals forthcoming in respect of signage on council property, on lamp posts and on private land, with the consent of the landowner.”
“I thank Jennifer McCann and others for bringing this motion to the House today, and whilst it is clearly important and welcome, everybody is mindful of the particular circumstances that have brought about this debate at this time: the tragic, sad and painful circumstances of the death of Valerie Armstrong and the impact on her immediate and extended family. <BR /> <BR />As other Members have indicated, there have been a number of other deaths arising from the use of these sorts of bikes, and many, many serious injuries. If you do any review of source material on these matters, you will find that there are regular incidents leading to serious injury or death on this island, in Britain and further afield.”
“I know the irony. It is not said tongue-in-cheek, Mr Speaker. Is it not time for that matter to be looked at?”
“On a point of order, Mr Speaker. This question should be asked in other places as well, but on one or two occasions during the last Question Time you indicated that Ministers in reply had up to two minutes, yet there seems to be a growing pattern of Executive Ministers taking at every opportunity two minutes.”
“Could I press the Minister? As you know, there are many voices in Belfast, in the chamber of commerce and in the council, pressing for the devolution of regeneration powers. That idea was derailed in the last mandate. That is not within your gift, but, as part of the Programme for Government, are you committed to and will you argue with the Minister for Communities and your Executive colleagues for the devolution of regeneration powers to councils?”
“I am pleased to respond. Beyond the issue of submission, we have had conversations with the Irish Labour Party about how to scale up. Our party leader met Micheál Martin, the leader of Fianna Fáil, and I personally have spoken to a representative of the Irish Government on this matter.”
“— any reference to the NCA? It is coy about the NCA, so let us put the NCA back in. Let Sinn Féin accept higher levels of accountability —”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. <BR /> <BR />Let the First Minister and deputy First Minister make a statement to the Assembly. Otherwise, it is a rush to the sound of clicking cameras, not to the sound of Members' hard questions on accountability. <BR /> <BR />Finally, why has Sinn Féin deleted —”
“Read your words, Mr O'Dowd. Your words see the First Minister and deputy First Minister rush to the sound —”
“— but has deleted the fact that it is a statement to the Assembly.”
“Secondly, the issue of reputational damage has been deleted, so let us put it in. Thirdly, let us put in the fact that the First Minister and deputy First Minister should make a statement to the Assembly. For some reason or another, Sinn Féin deletes the fact that the First Minister and deputy First Minister should make a statement —”
“Why? Because it is not the role of the Assembly to tell a policing authority how to conduct its affairs, but it is the role of the Assembly to give best advice. Let us give best advice by recommending what an all-Ireland investigation might be able to achieve.”
“I will give way in a second, because my next point arises from what Mr O'Dowd said earlier. He said that Mr Smith had over-read the Sinn Féin amendment because it deleted the reference to reputational damage — that that was meant to be included. If it was meant to be included, Mr O'Dowd, include it by supporting the SDLP amendment to the Ulster Unionist motion, which makes it explicit that reputational damage has arisen. I will give way to the Member.”
“I will deal with that matter in a second. How can Sinn Féin, who support all-Ireland in everything else, vote down a proposal for an all-Ireland criminal investigation if that is what the NCA and the Garda Síochána wish?”
“Let me ask Sinn Féin this question: as a party that purports to be all-Ireland, why are you resisting a call for the appropriate authorities — the NCA and the Garda — to consider an all-Ireland joint investigation team in respect of the criminal matters?”
“Otherwise, how can you explain what the Irish Government will do or what the Lawrence inquiry did? They were able to navigate between the criminal investigation on one hand and the requirements for accountability on the other. Let not this Chamber allow a smokescreen to be sent out in relation to this matter through the voices of the DUP. As other people have said, the issues of appointment, the MOU, the meetings, the phone calls that involved more than one party in the North, and the discounts are all matters that are outwith the criminal investigation and must be interrogated by the appropriate authorities on the island of Ireland. <BR /> <BR />My question, however, is to Sinn Féin, who Mr Maskey says have produced an amendment that is more comprehensive and inclusive than the amended Ulster Unionist motion under the SDLP proposal.”
“Is Mrs Pengelly saying to the British Government that, when they called for a commission of inquiry into the events and issues around the murder of Stephen Lawrence at the very time when there was an ongoing criminal investigation and, if my memory is right, criminal prosecution, that was bizarre and perverse? Are Mrs Pengelly and the DUP saying to the Public Accounts Committee in Dublin, before which certain senior people in NAMA will appear this week, that it is bizarre and perverse for that investigation to be going on? Is she saying to the Irish Government, which will perhaps announce a commission of investigation by the end of this week, that it is perverse and bizarre for them to ignore the advice of the NCA? <BR />The words "bizarre and perverse" are a smokescreen to deny accountability; let us be very clear about that.”
“Can we be very clear on what this debate is about? It is about whether we have higher levels of accountability or lesser levels of accountability. If there is a conflict and tension in the Chamber, it is between both of those. We know that the DUP wants to resist higher levels of accountability on this matter. The issue is this: does Sinn Féin also support resistance to higher levels of accountability on this issue? <BR /> <BR />The one DUP speaker, Mrs Pengelly, said that it is "bizarre and perverse" — her words — for anybody to ignore the advice of the NCA.”
“The Minister and all Members will be very aware of the distressing Prisoner Ombudsman report that was published in the first week of September. Will the Minister confirm that she has called in prison management in respect of that report? What did you say to them, if you met them? How will you ensure that the 63 recommendations in the report will be fully, quickly and faithfully implemented?”
“I welcome the fact that the meeting addressed the joint agency task force to tackle organised crime and criminality. Inevitably and properly, that will deal with paramilitarism. As the Minister will be aware, in Dublin today the British and Irish Governments are entering into a treaty to deal with paramilitarism. A four-person commission will also be established, two of whom will be nominated by the Executive. Will you advise when the Executive will nominate its two members of that commission? Are you being consulted about who those people should be?”
“Can you advise the Chamber of, or lodge in the Library, what proposals you have put to London so that the Northern Ireland Executive are not marginalised in the London negotiations with Europe on Brexit?”
“I acknowledge that the First Minister recognises that there are short-term challenges arising from the Brexit decision. She may want to review the Hansard record from yesterday and the comments of her Economy Minister, who appeared to bury his head in the sand about the short-term challenges. <BR /> <BR />The First Minister said in an earlier reply that the Northern Ireland Executive wanted a "full and active voice" for all of Northern Ireland in the Brexit negotiations. Of course, the deputy First Minister said in reply to an earlier question that you have not heard from London yet about what the role of the Northern Ireland Government might be in those negotiations.”
“Given that the Welfare Reform and Work Act 2016 freezes benefits up to 2020 and that that applies to Northern Ireland, and given that inflation is now anticipated, because of the EU vote, to be at least 2% in the next year and probably at that level for the next two or three years, can you confirm that, further to the Evason package, there is no mitigation available for people whose benefits are frozen arising from the 2016 legislation?”
“— we will not respond to the needs of victims and survivors as we should. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the fact that the House is not going to divide. I ask the Minister, in her response, to add certainty to her commitments in relation to this very important issue.”