Roy Beggs
East Antrim · Ulster Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“I declare an interest as owner of 25 acres of agricultural land; also, my parents run a small agricultural business. <BR /> <BR />There is a shortage of fertiliser, and the Minister has referred to the present difficulties in Ukraine that are contributing to that. That shortage exists even at the exorbitant cost of £1,000 per ton.”
“of public bodies in Northern Ireland. That is vital in order to reassure the public that money is being spent appropriately. That is to be done independently.”
“There has been a very close working relationship and a close partnership. Where issues needed highlighted and where the Assembly, through its scrutiny mechanisms, needed to dig deeper to get better value and better accountability, that occurred.”
“<BR /> <BR />I also want to reflect on the close working relationship that there has been between the Comptroller and Auditor General and the Northern Ireland Audit Office, which the C&AG oversees and manages, and the Assembly, particularly the Public Accounts Committee.”
“As we consider this motion to nominate a new Comptroller and Auditor General for Northern Ireland, it is important that we reflect on the importance that the role has in any democracy. The C&AG in Northern Ireland is the head of the Northern Ireland Audit Office.”
“P&O has brutally cast its workforce aside in a Dickensian fashion. There was no consultation or notice, and the company delivered a live message by video link. Will the Minister clarify whether the P&O redundancy announcement is covered by maritime law, Northern Ireland employment law or GB employment law?”
The complete record
Every one of 1,772 lines we hold for Roy Beggs, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 30 of 36.
“<BR /> <BR />The report submitted to the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly (BIPA) in February 2015 confirmed that fuel fraud cost the Exchequer an estimated £80 million in lost taxes in 2013 alone. However, there are other hidden costs: the cost of trying to clean the environment and of addressing the criminality associated with fuel laundering. <BR /> <BR />Mr Lynch mentioned the importance of giving more support to the NIEA. Yes, that is needed, but it is even more important that we close this down at source by giving the police and the National Crime Agency the information that will allow them to do their job. There is little point in continually having to spend millions of pounds of public money on cleaning up waste when the environment will still be damaged.”
“Fuel laundering criminality has been raised as an issue a number of times in the Assembly. That is testament not only to the importance to the community that the matter be addressed but to the lack of meaningful action that has been taken to address it by the authorities on both sides of the border. The illegal activity has denied finance to the Treasury, and, as others said, that has resulted in less money being available for our hospitals and schools. Instead, fuel laundering allows criminal gangs and terrorist groups to prosper, causes damage to the environment, threatens public health through endangering the water supply and fosters a climate of criminality and fear. In addition, it undermines legitimate businessmen.”
“The Member said that his colleagues had been standing up against this: have they been giving information and intelligence to the police and telling them where and when this activity is happening to help them to track down those responsible, many of whom will be former associates in the Provisional IRA, so that this is brought to an end for the benefit of the entire community?”
“Our people and their skills are our greatest asset when attracting new employers to Northern Ireland, and I am sure that the Minister would agree. Has he made any assessment as to how those cuts in university places are being received globally in terms of attracting new employment, new skills, new bases and new opportunities for our young people?”
“For clarification, the Minister is in fact correct. I referred to amendment No 6, which is what it was in his earlier correspondence. He is correct that it is amendment No 2 on the Marshalled List.”
“I will take the Speaker's advice, so I ask the Member whether, considering the amendments — he mentioned that he thought that there should be greater oversight of pensions in the Assembly — he will acknowledge that the place to adjust such legislation is Westminster. If excesses are occurring there, that is the place to go, and Members from Northern Ireland should fight the changes there. In reality, we do not have the funds in our block grant to make significant changes here.”
“<BR /> <BR />Turning specifically to amendment No 6, it would be helpful if the Minister could provide some elaboration and explanation. The note that was given to the Committee about that amendment refers to the "Welfare Reform (Northern Ireland) Act 2015", which, of course, is not in place. We were advised by his officials that that had originally been removed from the early drafts of the Pensions Bill as a consequence of the delays in the passage of the Welfare Reform Bill. This amendment brings it back in. We are still facing delays, so it would be helpful if the Minister could, when he sums up, give an explanation and state whether there has been progress on the Welfare Reform Bill, because the amendment refers to an Act, and give us some clarity on whether it is proper to refer in legislation to an Act that does not yet exist.”
“Equally, changes to pension parity with the rest of the United Kingdom, if included, would have to be carefully considered as they could have huge implications for our block grant and the cost of and ability to deliver any adjusted pensions locally. I am thankful that, to date, parity has been retained and that the amendments will continue such parity. <BR /> <BR />Turning to the amendments, it appears that they are consequential and technical in nature. Whilst I acknowledge that the Committee was advised early in March of the intention to bring forward amendments, it was disappointing that the formal notice of amendments was not issued to the Assembly and published to Members until 16 March. It would have been better if that had been done earlier to ensure that all Members were aware of changes.”
“As we progress this Pensions Bill, it is important, when considering any amendments, to consider the complexity of pensions legislation. For example, in the legislation, there are references to the Pensions Schemes Act, which the Minister mentioned, welfare legislation, the National Insurance (Northern Ireland) Act 1966 etc. It is all tied together, and any changes must be very carefully considered.”
“A reduction in the public transport subsidy has been passed down through the Finance Minister, and, despite the increase in local fares that has been implemented, some think that Translink is still under significant pressure. Would the Minister agree with a second fare increase for Translink?”
“The junior Minister highlighted the importance of education in allowing our young people and their families to move out of poverty in the future. Can he explain why early years funding has been reduced for a number of organisations in my constituency, including Kids Korner in the Antiville area, where there are some of the highest levels of child poverty in Northern Ireland?”
“In the earlier question, the Member tried to give the impression that he wants to protect jobs. Does the commissioner find that strange, given that the Member has approved a Budget with such a significant reduction and that a reduction in employment is a likely outcome? What lessons have been learned from the previous business efficiency programme that can be implemented to try to bring about savings so that such jobs losses will not have to be faced to balance our books?”
“In the Republic of Ireland, there is a very clear ambition to significantly increase the dairy sector and invest in practical research that will enable that to happen. Rewards will come to the producer and the manufacturing process industry. Will the Minister give us a figure of what has been invested in Northern Ireland? How has it been coordinated?”
“Given that consultation is already under way, the savings that could result and the huge pressure that his Department is under, is the Minister surprised that his officials have indicated that it could be up to two years before new legislation is introduced and delivered on the ground?”
“The figures for visitors to the constituency, looking at possible locations, are better than the Northern Ireland average but are still relatively low. Has the Minister noticed any increased interest since the development of the new dual carriageways to Larne and Carrickfergus?”
“Would the Member acknowledge that it is very disappointing that the programme that was, for the first time, drawing in large numbers of people to develop their basic numeracy and literacy skills, which Larne Enterprise Development Company (LEDCOM) provided in Larne, Carrickfergus and Moyle, has come to an end; that, to date, no one else has succeeded in providing that service; and that it is important that that service be continued?”
“I should also mention Carrick Enterprise. LEDCOM helps in a wide range of other activities throughout the community to make Larne a better place.”
“LEDCOM has a wonderful record of encouraging new employment and people to take up self-employment.”
“Wonderful opportunities will arise from that, and there is a high likelihood that more jobs will arise in East Antrim as a result of both those developments. <BR /> <BR />Of course, on top of that infrastructure, we are quite close to both airports: the international airport and the city airport. As others have said, we have a natural gas supply available in our main areas. Generally, we have a good broadband infrastructure, although it has to be acknowledged that there are still gaps in urban areas and in some rural areas. I certainly wish, as I indicated earlier, that all our business parks would have access to superfast broadband in order to allow our companies to develop. <BR /> <BR />We must praise the work that goes on in our local enterprise centres.”
“Thank you. Ultimately, if there is demand, you have to provide an opportunity. It would be nice if more employment could be provided locally, but we have to assess whether there is demand. There is no point in building empty buildings; there must be the demand. Certainly, I see great opportunities in the East Antrim area in the future. As others mentioned, with the A8 dual carriageway nearing completion, it will be easier for those who wish to come to Northern Ireland and East Antrim to visit. Equally, it will be easier and more attractive for employers to locate in East Antrim, whether it be in Larne or, indeed, Carrickfergus, with the A2 also nearing completion later this year. That will open up business areas that were previously deemed too difficult to access.”
“We have a very healthy number of apprenticeships operating between level 2 and level 3, some 357 I noted from a recent Assembly answer. I have to praise Larne Skills Development, which is drawing in young people from the entire East Antrim coastal area. I am aware that it provides a high success rate in providing long-term placement and, ultimately, employment. That must be commended as well. That is despite the fact that there is a very weak presence of further education opportunities locally in Larne. As has been mentioned —”
“It is surprising, when you go into some of the details, that, while we have a low unemployment rate, we have one of the lowest levels of employee jobs in any constituency in Northern Ireland. Why is that? It is because we have industrious people who get on their bike, get into their car, on the bus, on the train and go to work where the jobs are. For any employer out there who is listening, those people would be good, local, committed employees should that employer choose to locate somewhere more convenient in East Antrim. We have to recognise that, sometimes, you have to travel to the jobs, but we hope in future that more jobs will be provided locally. I commend our people who travel. <BR /> <BR />There are other interesting statistics.”
“I thank the Member for raising the topic in the Assembly. It is important that we talk about the opportunities for employers to come to East Antrim and for visitors to come and enjoy an experience that is not available in many other parts of the Province or, indeed, the world. I certainly view the east Antrim coastline as something very special, and any visitors who have travelled it with me have also found it very special. <BR /> <BR />We have limited natural resources. Apart from our natural environment, our main resource is our people. I noticed in recent claimant counts that the figures for 2014 show that unemployment in Carrickfergus and Newtownabbey is below the Northern Ireland average, and that has to be welcomed. We have an industrious people.”
“I am aware that, in other parts of the UK where there has been under-provision of superfast broadband, Openreach has facilitated local communities where it has not introduced that service, because of, it says, economic reasons. Has the Minister been in discussion with BT Openreach so that that type of flexible facility will be available to local communities and businesses, which may not be included in the scheme that she mentioned?”
“Will the Minister acknowledge that it would be healthy if there was a wider understanding of the pressures that schools are under, the poor condition of some of them and the need to rebuild so that, when deciding whether to build new departmental headquarters, thought is given to costs and options so that all Departments are prioritised appropriately?”
“I give a general welcome to the new departmental layout. I see savings and efficiencies coming from it, and there will also be an opportunity for better coordination to meet the needs of people. In terms of the operational aspects of the social investment fund, which are transferring to the Department of the community, which is largely built on DSD, is that a recognition of the delays in setting up the social investment fund and getting moneys out on the ground, and the inefficiency of having that duplication of service that already exists under DSD and local government?”
“I believe that the standard of decision-making in relation to sanctions is already monitored by the committee. If that is the case, why would the Department be reluctant to see this legislated for? I look forward to hear what the Minister will say in that regard. That concludes my comments on this section of the Bill.”
“These amendments, whilst they may be well meaning, could result in deadlock, which will mean further fines. We cannot afford that, as such fines would again adversely affect public services. Just look at what happened during this financial year where, mid-year, we had to claw back, through a number of Departments, and pull money back into the centre. That certainly has adversely affected my constituents, and I would not wish to see it happening again. <BR /> <BR />We note the commitment of the Minister to review the Act within three years. The Ulster Unionists are satisfied that the Department should have the ability to carry that out without having to bring in an independent organisation. <BR /> <BR />The final amendment I will address is in regard to giving the joint standards committee an enhanced role.”
“In addition, we will be hit with penalties of tens of millions of pounds in the new financial year beginning 2015-16. That will be happening unless we bring about change and implement changes. We simply cannot afford further delay.”
“<BR /> <BR />Amendment Nos 5 and 6 specifically seek to change the Assembly procedure for some of the most important regulations, including those on the standard allowance, housing costs and sanctions. It is crucial that those be properly reviewed, but there is a very real danger that the proposed changes could again result in a stalemate in the Assembly. That has to be recognised by all. Public services have already been hit with a penalty of some £100 million, as Sinn Féin walked itself into a corner, only to later change direction as our Budget process faced a crash a few weeks ago.”
“Given the lateness of the hour, I will try to conclude with remarks that are specifically on the amendments. <BR /> <BR />The matters in amendment Nos 5 and 6 were discussed at Consideration Stage. However, I realise that Mr Agnew is at least trying to focus his attention more specifically this time around. My party's concerns at Consideration Stage on just how much of the Bill is simply enabling legislation remain. Although I welcomed the Minister's explicit commitment to work with the Committee, we will have to wait some time to make a fair assessment of that. However, it certainly does no harm to raise the issue once again in order to maximise oversight of the regulations.”
“Does the Member recognise that there will be an issue with some three-bedroom houses? From constituency work over the past number of years, I am aware of a single male who is relatively young and has been left in a three-bedroom house. Meanwhile, we have families on waiting lists. Does he think that that is appropriate and that there should be no pressure on such an individual to downsize rather than drawing additional funds from our limited budget?”
“I would much prefer to have it before the change in legislation occurs.”
“Will the Minister clarify what is wrong with clause 81(3) remaining in the Bill? That does not preclude regulations implementing the effect of it being determined elsewhere. I still do not understand why that subsection has to be removed from the Bill rather than prescribed in regulations. Will the Minister explain?”
“The Minister explained the situation whereby someone who is in an existing Housing Executive property has been assessed as having excess bedrooms and so on. Will he clarify what the position will be for someone who is seeking to take up a new tenancy, particularly given the lack of one- and two-bedroom housing accommodation, which means that there may be difficulty in their finding suitable accommodation?”
“We would see our block grant, which would affect our health budget and our education budget, cut to pay for this suggested deviation from the legislation applying in the rest of the UK. No one knows what the costs for such an alteration to this primary legislation would be. There are already huge pressures in the National Health Service in Northern Ireland, and schools are facing budget cuts, although some of the final figures have yet to emerge. I will go as far as to say that it would be irresponsible to make the changes that are proposed in amendment No 27 and that that would adversely affect the citizens of Northern Ireland.”
“Who will be eligible for support under this fund, and, specifically, can he confirm whether he will offer total protection to new claimants so that they will not be worse off than they currently would be if they were to apply, as some are claiming? <BR /> <BR />Finally, we will be opposing amendment No 27 for the reasons that we spelt out at Consideration Stage. If we in Northern Ireland were the only part of the UK to remove the ability to apply the residence test, we could face significant additional costs. We alone in the UK could become a magnet for those willing to travel within the EU because of an enhanced Northern Ireland benefits system, and regulations would not be restricted on residency grounds.”
“<BR /> <BR />Another important element is the supplementary payment fund, which is £125 million over a five-year period. I believe that that was thought up within a couple of hours. Some parties in the Chamber now claim that it will cover each and every reduction, and not just existing claimants but new ones. That is quite a claim to make for a fund that will average £25 million a year. I do not think that the figures add up for those making such a claim. I assume that much of the fund will go to supporting people who are impacted on by the limitations on contribution-based employment support allowance (ESA). <BR /> <BR />I ask the Minister to address, once and for all, those claims from Sinn Féin and to give us some feedback.”
“It should be the norm among medical professionals that they are willing to share evidence as part of their basic contract so that there will be no additional cost to the public purse. At some point in the future, it would be good if we did not have to pay that and that it was deemed to be part of a GP or consultant's contract of employment. I hope that that will be the case, but we will have to wait. <BR /> <BR />I acknowledge that the compensation approach to the personal independence payment will have a significant extra cost. However, we should recognise this at least: the costs will not be open-ended. What is proposed is the so-called option A, meaning that the Department will have an even greater incentive to ensure that appeals are carried out in a timely manner.”
“The Minister misses the point that I have been making. I have been supportive of some of the expenditure that is occurring, but other Members are over-egging the pudding by saying that there will be almost no benefit changes and that everybody will be protected. There will be changes, and, ultimately, in the new benefit system, some people will not be as well off. Therefore, all this money — the £134 million in 2018-19 — will not go directly on additional benefit. It will go, and, in my opinion, correctly, towards some of the supportive measures that are being built in to try to protect people. However, that money may well go on administrative costs rather than on benefits. That is the reasoning behind some of my comments. <BR /> <BR />I return to the medical evidence package. Ideally, there should be sharing of medical evidence.”
“Much of it allows, for instance, for the additional administrative schemes. There is, for example, the personal independence payment (PIP) medical evidence package, and rightly so, as I think that it would be a good investment. Nevertheless, it will cost several million pounds in each of the next five years. However, it will not mean a higher rate of benefit for individual claimants. It will instead mean that some of the particular circumstances — such as our epidemic rates of poor mental health — are properly considered in the assessment process.”
“<BR /> <BR />We know that the Minister believes that the overall cost of the measures, including discretionary support, will reach a maximum of £134 million in 2018-19. We are told that it will begin to fall rapidly over the following years. Unfortunately, the Department has failed to detail exactly how and why it will fall, which must be a concern for us all. At £134 million for a single year, the cost will be greater than each of the yearly budgets for DCAL, the DOE and OFMDFM, and it will restrict the funding available for health, education, etc. There are choices to be made when spending money: when you spend it in one area, you are not able to spend it in another. <BR /> <BR />Much of the extra cost, contrary to what some in the Chamber or in the media would claim, does not equate to higher benefits in Northern Ireland.”
“Unfortunately, there was a lot of scaremongering and misinformation from the former, rather than the present, Minister in the run-up to these decisions finally being made, and that has hindered progress. The amendment has a number of very important aspects. On the whole, the original package of mitigation measures, whether it was for underoccupancy or changes to the administration of universal credit, has been fairly well discussed in public over the past 12 months. We reiterate, however, that unless there is a genuine effort to review our social housing stock, the projected decline in the cost of the underoccupancy penalty is unlikely, and the cost could well continue into the future.”
“First, it is regrettable that it has been tabled only at Further Consideration Stage rather than at an earlier stage, which means that we have no further opportunity for consideration and amendment. However, even more important is the lack of detail. We have what was agreed in the Stormont House talks, but, considering the games played in those, it is difficult to be reassured by anything that the DUP or Sinn Féin might say at present without first seeing it in black and white. Where are the draft regulations? It would have been helpful to publish them before now. <BR /> <BR />Previously, there were widely different estimates of the cost of the mitigation package, not least the changes to the administration of the universal credit system.”
“I assume that this might include major and deliberate fraud, which I would have thought would be sanctionable. How can it be justified for a claimant who has committed such an obvious act of deception to continue to receive up to another month's benefit? <BR /> <BR />We will support the duty for independent advice outlined in amendment Nos 17 and 23. I welcome the related assurance from the Minister on a more general duty. Still, it is important that there is good advice available to ensure that claimants maximise the benefits that they are entitled to. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 22 is one of the most important amendments to the whole Bill, and it is disappointing on two fronts.”
“We will not support amendment No 16. I agree that claimants should have the right to challenge sanctions but am totally opposed to the idea that they should continue to receive a full claim for up to a further four weeks. That money would also have to come out of our block grant, because we are deviating from the legislation applicable in other parts of the United Kingdom. I note that the amendment talks about:”
“Surely our system can get the necessary information together after four months so that claimants can have a decision. I would like the Minister to comment on that, too.”
“Considering the fallout in Great Britain, where successful claimants have had to wait months on end — a ridiculous amount of time — the proposal for 16 weeks — almost four months — has some merit.”
“The problem is, of course — I have made this point on a number of occasions during these debates — that the Department has greater control of that and greater powers over the regulations, and the Assembly would have a lesser role. I have not heard a convincing argument as to why that change is needed. When the Minister is summing up, I would welcome his explanation, because I cannot see any reason why it cannot stay in the Bill. <BR /> <BR />I note the Minister's previous comments that departmental officials were working with colleagues in the Department of Health to review the GP contract. If that change is secured, I believe that the current wording in clause 81 should be no impediment to it. <BR /> <BR />I listened carefully to Mr Agnew on amendment No 15.”
“<BR /> <BR />In future, if reasonable alternative accommodation is available, why should there not be other adjustments? By including this amendment, future options cannot be considered without new primary legislation. Why should others be forced to live in overcrowded conditions if suitable accommodation were to exist to meet the needs of all? <BR /> <BR />On first reading, I saw amendment Nos 13 and 14 as a tidying-up, technical issue, but when I reflected on them, I saw that something more significant could be afoot. I want the Minister to come back on this. At this time, the Ulster Unionist Party is unable to support the Minister's amendment Nos 13 and 14. I can see what the Department is trying to do, which is to move the duty to ensure medical evidence from primary legislation to the regulations.”