Patrick Brown
South Down · Alliance Party · Northern Ireland
“Thank you Mr Speaker, for giving leave to allow this petition to be presented. The petition consists of 12,738 signatures calling for the completion of A1 road improvements.”
“It carries over 40,000 vehicles a day and is a vital North/South transport link on the economic corridor between Dublin and Belfast. However, along the 25 kilometre stretch from Hillsborough to Loughbrickland, it is peppered with junctions from main roads and private accesses and has turning gaps all down the central reserve, creating hug…”
“I therefore call on the Finance Minister to work with the Infrastructure Minister to ensure that works on the scheme can begin soon and ask both Ministers to continue to engage with colleagues in the South to explore additional funding for road safety upgrades on the A1.”
“Thank you, deputy First Minister. Given that the Executive Office has tabled an applicability motion regarding a new EU act on organic pet food, can the deputy First Minister confirm that her Department will take a similar approach to any and all future EU acts that fall within the remit of an applicability motion?”
“I thank the signatories to the motion for tabling it. It is a very important issue and one that deserves perhaps more attention than it often gets. NI Water is a crucial aspect of our infrastructure in Northern Ireland and provides a service that none of us can live without: clean, fresh water and the safe disposal of waste water.”
“It adds unnecessary costs to developers, costs that, as has been discussed, will ultimately be passed on to homebuyers and reflect wasted potential in our economy.”
The complete record
Every one of 105 lines we hold for Patrick Brown, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 3.
“What specific learnings and actions is the Minister taking to prevent delays when the system is rolled out in other trust areas?”
“Thank you, deputy First Minister. Given that the Executive Office has tabled an applicability motion regarding a new EU act on organic pet food, can the deputy First Minister confirm that her Department will take a similar approach to any and all future EU acts that fall within the remit of an applicability motion?”
“I therefore call on the Finance Minister to work with the Infrastructure Minister to ensure that works on the scheme can begin soon and ask both Ministers to continue to engage with colleagues in the South to explore additional funding for road safety upgrades on the A1. <BR /> <BR />I also welcome last week's announcement from DFI that the Department plans to deliver the scheme via smaller, phased packages, which will allow aspects of the scheme to move forward and, hopefully, see the most dangerous parts of the road being prioritised to prevent further tragic loss of life.”
“It carries over 40,000 vehicles a day and is a vital North/South transport link on the economic corridor between Dublin and Belfast. However, along the 25 kilometre stretch from Hillsborough to Loughbrickland, it is peppered with junctions from main roads and private accesses and has turning gaps all down the central reserve, creating huge risk for fast-moving vehicles on the dual carriageway. Planned upgrades to that stretch of road have existed since 2007 but, unfortunately, have not been meaningfully progressed. I understand that the business case for the scheme is nearing completion, and that securing adequate budget will be crucial to seeing it progressed in the near future.”
“Thank you Mr Speaker, for giving leave to allow this petition to be presented. The petition consists of 12,738 signatures calling for the completion of A1 road improvements. It was started by Ciara Sands and Monica Heaney of campaign group, A1: How Many Must Die, following the tragic death of Ciara’s partner, and Monica's son, Karl Heaney, in May 2018. <BR /> <BR />Since then, that group has been campaigning tirelessly to see the completion of upgrade works to the A1. It is an exceptionally dangerous road, on which, in the past 17 years, more than 40 lives have been lost. I take this opportunity to pay tribute to all the campaigners and all those who signed the petition and, who, together, have kept the issue high on the public agenda. <BR /> <BR />The A1 is one of the busiest roads in Northern Ireland.”
“The Member talks about bringing NI Water into public ownership. Will he outline who the private owners are?”
“Ultimately, the current funding constraints across the Executive and the lack of a multi-year budget mean that NI Water will remain strategically and financially constrained. We cannot continue to tread water on this, Minister, and, unfortunately, blaming Tory austerity and pointing out funding shortfalls will not cut it. The Minister must wade through the detail and present clear and tangible solutions.”
“A mutualised model for NI Water would require democratic oversight and transparent pricing in which the company would be able to borrow against its extensive asset base with loans secured by the public expenditure that NI Water would continue to receive for providing its vital service. That could be achieved by a separation of the charges already levied on water in the regional rate, for example. That would, essentially, be a change in how we account for that expenditure. <BR /> <BR />That is not privatisation in sheep's clothing and should not be automatically dismissed on the basis of ideology, which should not get in the way of a sustainable funding model for NI Water.”
“I thank the Member; I am well aware of that. The intervention that she took from the Member for Fermanagh and South Tyrone also outlined that issue with regard to consent to discharge. It is a scary fact. <BR /> <BR />It must be noted that the mutualised Welsh Water has also faced significant issues over governance and transparency, but it is, at least, more accountable and follows a not-for-profit model, a model from which we can, potentially, learn lessons. Going down the route of mutualisation will still require careful stewardship, and any mutualised body must be structured in a way that ensures that households are not burdened with additional charges for water.”
“To be clear, because this often gets lost in the commentary around the issue, mutualisation is not privatisation. Indeed, the Minister is right to rule out any privatisation, the failure of which we can clearly see in England in the case of Thames Water, which is £18·3 billion in debt and last year dumped a record 72 billion litres of untreated raw sewage into waterways. The Thames Water model, in which the company has, for years, borrowed against assets to fund shareholder dividends rather than invest in upgrades to its asset base and has consistently hiked charges on consumers to keep itself afloat, is, of course, something that we must avoid.”
“It adds unnecessary costs to developers, costs that, as has been discussed, will ultimately be passed on to homebuyers and reflect wasted potential in our economy. Without those additional costs, housing and regeneration projects could move more quickly through the planning system, helping us meet the chronic lack of housing in Northern Ireland and move the economy forward. <BR /> <BR />With that in mind, I welcome the Audit Office's recommendation that the Department and NI Water complete a comprehensive review of alternative funding and governance arrangements. Our party has long expressed concern that the current model is unsustainable. We have, for example, supported the idea of mutualising NI Water with guidance from the Fiscal Council.”
“<BR /> <BR />I know at first hand of that real-life impact, with every major town in my constituency featured on the Audit Office's list of waste water treatment works that are at or near capacity. Just before Easter, I visited the treatment works in the village of Dundrum, where development associations, trying to spur regeneration efforts in the area, are having to find creative and expensive ways of taking storm water out of combined systems to increase capacity in the waste water system and avoid statutory objections to their planning applications. While I welcome NI Water's willingness to work with developers and planners to find those creative solutions, it really should not have to be this way.”
“It is foundational economic infrastructure that is crucial to our quality of life and to the wider economy. It requires prioritisation in the forthcoming Budget. The current projected shortfall of £1 billion for PC21 means that NI Water will no longer be able to deliver the essential works required to increase the capacity of its network and meet the current demand for water infrastructure. No doubt many of us will have read last week's press release from the Construction Employers Federation. The Member for Strangford referenced it. It is a stark reminder of the housing crisis that we face and the fact that current waste water constraints are holding back the building of as many as 19,000 new homes across Northern Ireland.”
“I thank the signatories to the motion for tabling it. It is a very important issue and one that deserves perhaps more attention than it often gets. NI Water is a crucial aspect of our infrastructure in Northern Ireland and provides a service that none of us can live without: clean, fresh water and the safe disposal of waste water. I also welcome the amendment and confirm our party's support for the motion and the amendment. <BR /> <BR />For too long, NI Water has been a Cinderella service that has suffered from historical underinvestment. The timely report at the end of March from the NI Audit Office was an important reminder of what we already know about the underfunding of Northern Ireland's water infrastructure: it has been chronically neglected.”
“Clearly the Member was not paying attention to my early comments about my preference to have seen this tabled by FM and dFM. Is the Member aware of the provision that, if no Member tables an applicability motion, it defaults to the Speaker to table it anyway? There are safeguards to ensure that the applicability motion is heard.”
“It is clear in the explanatory memorandum that the direction of travel in terms of UK Government policy is to avoid any new regulatory border of any substance. There is therefore little in that regard for the Joint Committee to consider when it considers the applicability motion. <BR /> <BR />This is a highly niche area, blown out of proportion as the first public test of the Donaldson deal. The real impact is the message that we send to craft and manufacturing businesses and the wider private sector around the stability and regulatory certainty of investing and thriving in this place, a message that we should all reflect on deeply today.”
“Indeed, it is highly likely that similar GB-based products will also seek the benefits of dual market access anyway, as the UK Government have made clear via their explanatory memorandum that GB products will have their own protections but will still be able to seek access to the new EU scheme and the export benefits and protections that it brings. Similarly, Northern Irish non-agricultural GIs will continue to have a route to trade and seek protection in the GB market as well, and it is not anticipated by the UK Government that that will create insurmountable practical issues for east-west trade, as clearly demonstrated by the current coexistence of trademarks with existing GI schemes for agricultural products.”
“The DUP seems to have arrived at a position where any checks on goods entering Northern Ireland are a bad thing; that trade friction is a bad thing. If only we had an economic union that would allow frictionless trade with our most important and significant trading partners. <BR /> <BR />The DUP talks of the cost of policing the outworkings of the legislation, but one Member's policing is another Member's protection. In prioritising anti-protocol rhetoric over facts and evidence, we risk losing sight of the merits of the legislation in front of us. Applying the legislation here via the Windsor framework will allow these home-grown products to benefit from dual market access.”
“I will continue, Mr Speaker, as I have taken quite a few interventions. <BR /> <BR />After all, the approach taken by the legislation follows that established by the existing GI schemes for agri-food, as I mentioned, and wines and spirits. Therefore, we can only deduce from the DUP and the UUP that they would be against the GI schemes for our agri-food sector and drinks sector if they were presented today. We see clear evidence that those opposing the motion are not doing so because of a considered view of its merits but because it carries the label of EU law. That is no basis for the Chamber to make decisions that impact on people's lives and livelihoods. The Member for Upper Bann talked of the imposition of checks.”
“I have not directly engaged with any businesses. Has the Member for Upper Bann?”
“What we are doing right now is democratic scrutiny, and I am pleased that, after almost two years of being an elected MLA for South Down, I am finally able to fulfil that role.”
“It is clear that it will have a relatively minimal impact on producers in Northern Ireland. That is clear from the briefing that we have seen, but we see the positive benefits from the agriculture geographical indicators that protect whiskey products, apples and potatoes in Northern Ireland. This is like-for-like legislation for these protections; it is just extended to craft and industrial products.”
“I am satisfied on the basis of information that has been provided to me and, indeed, all Members in the Chamber that the legislation can have a positive impact on local producers in Northern Ireland. Ultimately, it is up to each Member to make their decision, but has the Member read the briefing pack, which gives consideration to the potential positives and negatives of the legislation?”
“Well, we have, and it was not difficult or complex for our party or, indeed, others to conclude that the legislation would have a limited but important and positive impact on local craft and industrial producers in Northern Ireland.”
“Such safeguards protect valued local industries against cheap knock-off merchandise from those in other countries or, indeed, from within the UK market — the leader of the Opposition rightly identified them earlier as the "Del Boy industries" — that may opportunistically seek to trade on their brand value, which we should all, surely, be keen to guard against. <BR /> <BR />The leader of the UUP said that he has not had the time to scrutinise the legislation and indicated that, as a result, he will vote against the motion. I asked him whether he had read the comprehensive information pack provided to Members by RaISe or the UK Government's explanatory memorandum to the legislation. He rightly pointed out that we must stop and think.”
“<BR /> <BR />The new regulation would establish a new EU-wide system placing additional regulations known as "non-agricultural geographical indications" on craft and industrial products where their origin is of intrinsic value to the quality, brand and significance of that product. Examples of Northern Irish products that may fall under the scheme might include Irish linen, and, in GB, it could apply to products like Sheffield steel, Harris tweed and Savile Row apparel. Similar statutory protections already exist in the UK to safeguard traditional food and drink products, such as Cornish pasties, and the new legislation will simply extend a similar principle to manufactured craft or industrial products.”
“Or are we going to jingoistically and ideologically try to vote down any legislation that would support and enhance dual market activity and, in the case of the motion, rule out valuable protections for Northern Irish producers? You cannot have it both ways, and the message that we send out today, on the first of what will likely be many applicability motions in this mandate, is the same one that we send to investors, industry and, indeed, our home-grown craft businesses. We know where we stand as a party on the benefits of dual market access, and it is clear that the DUP and others do not.”
“Any damage that emanates from what the Member is talking about is solely a result of Brexit. That is the Brexit that his party supported and the hard-right Tory Brexit that his party pushed through and that had its origins in the confidence-and-supply deal under the May Government and further Tory Governments. Our primary responsibility here is to protect businesses in Northern Ireland, and that is exactly what the legislation sets out to do. <BR /> <BR />Are we supporting dual market access and all the benefits that it brings, the very thing that the DUP leader is on record as supporting and that senior members of the DUP and other parties were promoting in Washington all last week?”
“<BR /> <BR />The debate also takes place in the lamentable context where the votes of 20% of Members will count for less, as the anachronistic demands of cross-community support devalue the votes of those of us who do not define ourselves on a binary nationalist or unionist basis. Whilst our votes will be counted, that fact reflects the continued democratic deficit in the Chamber, something to which the Member for Upper Bann made clear his aversion in an entirely different context several times in the debate. <BR /> <BR />The DUP may think that it has secured some sort of trump card on influencing the applicability of any EU law when all that it is doing is sending a message to businesses that the Chamber does not know where it stands. Are we supporting dual market access and all the benefits that it brings?”
“<BR /> <BR />Ultimately, the UK Government can choose to override the direction of any applicability motion that is passed today, should the Joint Committee decide that the law would not create a new regulatory border or if exceptional circumstances apply. Those criteria must inform our comments and how we vote today, and I have heard nothing substantive from those who intend to vote down the motion about how the regulatory border would exist, except to protect the integrity of indigenous craft products. Even then, as others have outlined, such an approach already exists for agricultural geographical indication (GI) products such as certain whiskies, apples and potatoes.”
“The First Minister and deputy First Minister should have tabled the motion, and, whilst Members have referred to the fact that those who support the motion's intent could have tabled it themselves, it would have been wholly more appropriate and sent a much more positive message if the First Minister and deputy First Minister had jointly tabled the motion within two weeks of notification, as set out in the Windsor framework. Instead, we have an unfortunate precedent in which individual Members may seek the mirage of shooting down EU law in the Chamber when the motion does nothing of the sort.”
“It is important to be clear that, while the motion is neither binding nor definitive, it is true that the UK Government cannot apply any new EU legislation until an applicability motion has been heard.”
“As is probably clear already, my party will vote for the motion, although, in somewhat bizarre circumstances, those who tabled it will not. As a member of the Windsor Framework Democratic Scrutiny Committee, I feel that it is important to note that applicability motions fall outside the remit of that Committee and serve only as an advisory function to the UK Government on whether new EU regulations should apply in Northern Ireland.”
“Does the Member recognise that there is a democratic deficit in that certain Members' votes will not be counted equally to those of others when we vote on the motion?”
“Northern Irish drivers often spend far less on annual repairs than those in GB, thanks to an impartial testing regime with no reduction in safety standards. There is no doubt that a full-scale move to privatisation could leave many road users out of pocket, with no standardised means of identifying the mechanical work that is needed to pass an MOT. <BR /> <BR />We need to make this system work, not scrap it. That is why we call on the Minister to urgently implement a clear plan of action to tackle the backlog, address lift failures, sort out delays in new testing centres, publish clear and accurate data on average waiting times, tackle any staffing issues and, finally, introduce biennial testing, at least on a trial basis. I wish the Minister well in finally seeing those changes being implemented.”
“<BR /> <BR />In recent years, I have basically given up on getting a test at the Downpatrick testing centre and usually have to travel to Ards as the next-nearest centre — although, given that the Member for Strangford is behind me, I will say that travelling up to Ards is, of course, always a lovely experience — but many others are not so lucky and will have to go much further than that for a test. Of course, the situation only got worse during the two years in which we had no elected Ministers to make the decisions to deliver change to the MOT system. <BR /> <BR />I believe that the Minister is right to rule out privatisation as an option. When our system is operating properly, it is far superior to the GB system.”
“It is clear that we must do something. In recent years, all of us will have been inundated with constituents who are at their wits' end, having spent hours trying to secure an appointment and potentially having to travel across the country, often months down the line, all the while dealing with the stress of not knowing whether their vehicle is roadworthy. The current system is simply not working. The backlog impacts rural constituents in particular, such as those whom I represent; as the motion correctly recognises, they are more likely to have to travel further or wait longer for an appointment to become available at their local test centre, with the associated costs and stress of that.”
“I take this opportunity to thank the current AERA Minister for his diligence in responding to it, and for outlining our party's support for a trial of a four-, two- and one-year testing regime, depending on the age of the vehicle. <BR /> <BR />The call for evidence found that 85% of individuals would support biennial testing for private cars, with majorities also in favour of that for light goods vehicles and motorcycles. Although we recognise that there are legitimate concerns among industry, NIPSA and the PSNI about moving to a biennial system, we do, on balance, feel that a trial of that approach can be a solution to addressing the backlog without compromising road safety standards or negatively impacting on the private sector.”
“and associated issues. <BR /> <BR />He would not be the first Minister to try to begin to address the problem. As Mr Durkan pointed out, Minister Mallon opened the call for evidence on biennial testing in August 2021, seeking views from individuals, industry and other key stakeholders. That call for evidence produced valuable data on the merits and levels of support for biennial testing as a possible solution. Any future consultation or legislation should seek to build on that. <BR /> <BR />On that basis, we support the call for further consultation in the amendment. It is disappointing that there was no time in the previous mandate to carry out that consultation exercise. It is also disappointing that, despite most political parties identifying biennial testing as a possible solution, only one managed to respond to the call for evidence.”
“I just had a quick check on Twitter to see whether any of my comments would be out of date by the time that my speech has finished, but I was not able to find anything just yet, so I will proceed regardless. <BR /> <BR />I support the motion, which gives voice to significant frustration and anger among the general public, who have had to face unacceptable delays to vehicle testing services for the past number of years. The Minister must take urgent action to deal with the issue. We welcome the motion's call for:”
“I thank the Minister for his positive response regarding the rural micro capital grant scheme. Will he outline how the scheme will help rural community and voluntary organisations?”
“Does the Minister agree that antisocial behaviour is an incredibly complex area that cannot be tackled through legislation alone and that we need to focus on trying to deal with the root causes of the behaviour?”
“The economic ripple effect of the project in Strabane and Omagh would be huge and would breathe new life into those important but often forgotten towns, given the improved linkages that it would also create with the cities of Derry, Belfast and Dublin. <BR /> <BR />I conclude by recognising those who have campaigned tirelessly over many years to make the plans a reality, particularly the 'A5 Enough is Enough' campaign, its founders Tyrone GAA and all the families who have lost someone on the A5. I also recognise the broad, cross-party support for the scheme and the efforts of our councillor in Omagh, Stephen Donnelly, who has worked hard to see it progress. I hope that all parties will come together at the Executive to finally see the project funded and delivered.”
“Now that we have the welcome commitment from the Irish Government to provide €600 million towards the cost, it is on the Executive to come up with a plan for its delivery that may include asking the Irish Government to meet their original commitment to fund half the project, given that their current contribution equates to roughly a third of the total cost. <BR /> <BR />Whilst a phased approach may undermine the cost-benefit analysis informing the business case, it would make perhaps most sense to focus on the sections linking Derry and Strabane and Omagh to Ballygawley, given how highly those stretches figure in fatality statistics.”
“Such works, as have been the practice to date, are only a sticking plaster, and, whilst we know that the cost of the scheme is significant — as much as £1·6 billion — it is also vital for the safety of road users that we deliver it, the largest road project in the history of Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />We have seen the inflation of capital-build costs of other projects make the headlines in recent days, and that serves as a lesson: where we have crucial infrastructure to build, time is of the essence in case costs spiral even further upwards. Consider, for example, that the project was estimated to cost £800 million in 2007.”
“The A5 serves an enormous number of side roads, houses, farms and other accesses. Those many junctions, combined with increased vehicular traffic in recent decades, is the main reason why the road is so dangerous and why we must deliver an alternative. In one year alone, between October 2021 and October 2022, 10 people tragically lost their lives on the A5. The road accounts for 11% of road deaths in Northern Ireland. Yet it is the main road linking Donegal with Dublin, as well as Derry, Omagh and Strabane, carrying over 17,000 vehicles per day. The route is a crucial part of our infrastructure, economy and North/South connectivity, yet it is a single-carriageway road for most of its 58-mile length, with just a few overtaking lanes. Simply focusing on minor mitigation schemes will not do enough to secure road safety on the A5.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. As this is my first time addressing you in the Chair, I congratulate you on your new position. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate as an Alliance Party infrastructure spokesperson and a member of that Committee. I thank the Member for West Tyrone for bringing this to the Chamber. I hope that the debate contributes to a renewed sense of momentum behind this important, major road project. <BR /> <BR />We could say a lot about the scheme and its benefits to the area and to the major towns of Omagh and Strabane. However, perhaps the most important factor to reflect on is that, since the original plans for the road were launched in 2007, almost 50 people have died on what is one of the most dangerous roads on these islands.”
“I thank the Minister for his response. Will he commit to meeting local campaigners, including the A1: How Many Must Die? group?”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. He has clearly articulated the need to balance public safety with animal welfare. How does his statement relate to his wider agenda for updating animal welfare legislation and policy in Northern Ireland?”
“Given its clear importance for road safety, I call on the Minister for Infrastructure to prioritise the scheme in his Department's capital budget and to explore ways of working with our partners in the South to secure funding for it.”