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 31 of 36.
“OK. Essentially, when we choose not to make money available for social houses and we choose to put money into other projects, we can build fewer homes. Why not use existing vacant office accommodation, spend less money on new builds for office accommodation and put more money into social housing? Choices are made when we spend public money. Much of the information on the bedroom tax and the Executive's mitigation package will come to light only through regulations. Nevertheless, we trust that the offers of alternative accommodation will be genuine and that someone might be faced with a reduction to their housing benefit only after the proper process has been followed. Of course, pensioners will be protected, and rightly so.”
“When you spend our limited capital funding in one area, money is not available in others. Look at the accommodation that is available in the East Londonderry constituency. Only 15 miles away —”
“We need the social housing development programme to be changed and rebalanced so that it matches the pressures on our housing stock. <BR /> <BR />We are not building anywhere near the required number of new homes. Our target of 2,000 new properties already falls well short of actual need. It is of concern that it looks as if we will not be able to build that number. We are told that budget pressures are to blame. There are budget pressures, but there are also budget choices. Look at what the Finance Minister has done: he sat back and watched feebly as Sinn Féin pressed ahead with its pet projects, such as the proposed relocation of DARD headquarters, without an independent Department of Finance and Personnel assessment of DARD's business case. Costs are already escalating for that.”
“Reducing household running costs by simply reducing the space and the heating requirements would be another benefit that would follow on from that provision and more citizens would be able to be assisted through social housing support. <BR /> <BR />Much of our opposition to the proposed bedroom tax was based on the fact that suitable alternative accommodation was simply not available in Northern Ireland, so it is right that protection is being built in against a bedroom tax. We simply do not have the right number or right types of homes. All levels of social housing are oversubscribed, but, once this penalty comes into effect, I believe that smaller one- and two-bedroom homes will become even more difficult to acquire. To address that, we need more than platitudes from the Minister.”
“I would be concerned that putting that requirement so explicitly into the Bill could potentially lead to all sorts of problems like delays and additional bureaucracy and administration costs. I will listen carefully to what others have to say. <BR /> <BR />We will not support amendment Nos 21 and 11. Whilst I understand what the SDLP is seeking to do and I have sympathy for some of its position, considering the smoke and mirrors that are being played out by some parties in the Chamber, the position of the Ulster Unionist Party is that people should live in accommodation that broadly matches their requirements.”
“It makes sense to have such explanations in writing, not only to better inform claimants but as supporting evidence for the benefits advisers. It would also ensure that they would have to have clarity about the decisions that they were making and would have to stand over. That seems logical. I would be surprised, however, if the Social Security Agency was not already doing that. I ask the Minister to detail what the process is. However, we are minded to support that batch of amendments if we do not hear something significant. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 4 seeks to ensure that section 6 of the Human Rights Act applies to persons who are carrying out the work that is delegated by the Department.”
“<BR /> <BR />As I have said previously, such an amendment will not only incur significant extra costs through increased benefits but could potentially require a new administration system. Does the proposer of the amendment know whether that is possible and what it would cost? Those are real issues, and you cannot make amendments without knowing the answers. We are setting legislation. I certainly believe that change is necessary and should be pursued at a Westminster level. I encourage all our MPs to pursue the matter there. <BR /> <BR />Amendment Nos 2, 3, 8 and 9 that have been tabled by the SDLP relate to the production of explanatory documents for sanctions. That sounds like a reasonable proposition.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, for the opportunity to comment at this stage of the Bill. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 1 was previously discussed at Consideration Stage. It must be acknowledged that some local families with a disabled child will see a reduction in their support. Importantly, however, as has been said, some households will see an increase through the higher rate of child addition, as the new rate payable to severely disabled children will be very slightly higher than the current child tax credit equivalent. I understand that those who will receive a lower disability rate for universal credit could be significantly worse off. However, I trust that existing claimants will be supported through the transitional protections that are being built in.”
“I thank the Minister for her answer and her support on the issue. Can she advise whether a detailed archive list is available to councils so that they can perhaps identify items of local interest? Local people could see them, and the items would enhance important tourist facilities looked after by the Department of the Environment, such as Carrickfergus Castle.”
“It will take some time for the new affordable warmth scheme to get up and running, and the Minister mentioned that it would replace the warm homes scheme. Will he assure me that all those who applied under the warm homes scheme before the deadline date will, despite there perhaps being a late surge, receive payment for any work that has been carried out?”
“The concessionary fares scheme provides the means by which a single pass can enable someone to travel by bus or rail. That is a form of integrated ticketing, and the Minister has mentioned that. Will he give us an update on his plans for integrated ticketing for public-sector transport — bus and rail?”
“<BR /> <BR />I am pleased to present to you the petition, which seeks to increase the awareness of the importance of mental health and well-being as part of the school curriculum, on behalf of my constituent Sara Patterson.”
“<BR /> <BR />In a survey, the Mental Health Foundation found that helping others can reduce stress, improve emotional well-being, bring a sense of belonging, reduce isolation and get rid of negative feelings. <BR /> <BR />Sara is proposing that the emotional well-being module becomes compulsory for every young person at school. That would be helpful in reducing the current stigma attached to mental health issues, and it may encourage those who are suffering to seek help. That would be particularly useful during the pressures of adolescence. How many of our young people are aware of the importance of regular exercise, the outdoor green environment and volunteering in improving physical and mental health? Furthermore, how many of them know where they can go to get help when it is needed?”
“It is important to empower our young people and to increase their awareness of mental health and the importance of well-being when at school and in later life. <BR /> <BR />The pressures on our young people today are different from those of previous generations. There is increased pressure on achieving academic results; fewer young people are active in sport; less time is being spent in the outdoor and natural environment; the Internet, computer gaming, social media etc can create problems with isolation; Internet bullying can lead to a loss of self-esteem and poor mental health; and, of course, the smartphone has brought the intensity of social media pressures to a new level.”
“In a recent NUS-Rethink Northern Ireland study, it was found that some 27% of college and university students in Northern Ireland suffer from mental health difficulties. The Open Your Mind campaign was launched recently to raise awareness of that significant figure.”
“I wish to present the petition on behalf of Sara Patterson, who is a year-14 pupil at Carrickfergus Grammar School and is seeking to make mental health and well-being a compulsory and more significant part of the Northern Ireland school curriculum. With the support of her friends, Sara has collected signatures by going door to door. She has also organised an online petition using the change.org website. Some 605 signatures have been collected, and I wish to put on record my admiration for Sara's vision and efforts to increase the awareness of mental health issues and to make students at our schools more knowledgeable about how to improve their mental health and well-being. <BR /> <BR />Whilst there is a topic of emotional well-being in the curriculum, it is not compulsory, and I understand that many schools choose not to teach it.”
“Does the Minister agree that the cuts to the Police Service that have been highlighted and the effect that they will have on the ground mean that the public will want to ensure that appropriate funding is committed to administration and will want to see reductions in that area? Whose call is it, ultimately, to set the figures? Is it his call, and how will he deal with existing appointments?”
“Missed hospital appointments have been particularly high in some units and in some specialised areas. Can the Minister advise what action he proposes to take in the forthcoming year to try to address that specific issue, particularly in relation to those who may have mental health conditions, an area in which absentee rates have been particularly high?”
“I too welcome the Minister's statement and indicate my continuing support for a specialist medicines fund in Northern Ireland similar to that in Scotland. I have concerns about a potential £25 charge, or £1 charge, for those who may have long-term conditions and particularly those who may be living in poverty. Given the recent Northern Ireland Audit Office report into primary care prescribing, which indicated that very significant savings could still be made and that one drug alone — Pregabalin — could be costing an additional £10 million because of oversubscription. The report also found that some GP prescribing rates per patient are twice that of others. Why is he not gaining efficiency savings to fund such a proposal?”
“I thank the First Minister for his answer. I think that, if he reflects on Hansard, he will see that I never said that £80 million was expected in the Northern Trust area; I was simply reflecting the total amount. <BR /> <BR />Will he not acknowledge that it has been very slow to get to ground? In what time frame will this be delivered, and when will disadvantaged members of my constituency expect to see some benefit from it?”
“Does the Member accept that, under the confirmatory method, it will come back to the Assembly and there will be a requirement for debate and discussion, but at least that will happen without delays that bring about additional financial burdens?”
“I see them as largely technical in nature and reflecting the many changes that have occurred over the past two years during the very long period in which the Bill was sitting on the shelf. I am pleased that we seem to be moving forward constructively. I hope that the dialogue and cooperation will continue so that we can enable the legislation to go through its next stage and that, as a result, we in Northern Ireland will avoid potential fines costing hundreds of millions of pounds that will adversely affect our public services and our citizens.”
“I welcome that commitment, and it is equally important that there is sufficient time for the Committee to feed into and give feedback to what is being proposed. A responsibility will also fall on the Committee, which will have to demonstrate similar good faith in return by carefully avoiding putting any unnecessary delays or obstacles in place. If the Committee wishes to keep that positive working relationship, there will be a responsibility on it to do everything that is reasonable, and in a timely fashion. That will be a huge ask of the Committee. I suspect that there is much work ahead on this issue. <BR /> <BR />I do not intend to comment on the rest of the amendments in the group.”
“It is my natural inclination to go in that direction but I can see, given the experience of this Assembly in dealing with these difficult issues, very practical problems that might contribute to adverse relations within the Assembly once more, causing even greater problems than the possible financial difficulties. <BR /> <BR />The Ulster Unionist Party will not support amendment Nos 21 and 40 as long as the Minister gives a commitment in his comments that he will ensure that the relevant Committee, whether the Social Development Committee or some new Ad Hoc Committee, will be afforded whatever number of briefings by the Department is deemed necessary.”
“I have genuine concerns that we could reach similar stand-offs that could very easily build up regarding many of the key regulations. Such stalemates would only lead to further breaches of parity, further frustrations from the Treasury and further reductions of public expenditure in Northern Ireland. Again, fines — possibly tens of millions of pounds — could occur, with the likelihood of in-year budget clawbacks, as happened in the current financial year. Look at the emergency closures and reductions in public services that resulted. I do not think that I am stretching imagination too far; this could very easily happen again were we to adopt that approach.”
“The regulations will be just as strong, and will, in many cases, have a greater impact than anything that may have been written into the Bill itself. <BR /> <BR />I accept that the Committees normally have an important role to play in the process when it comes to correcting or changing any elements of what has been proposed, but we have to recognise that, ultimately, the power remains with the Departments. Amendments can be sought but they do not necessarily have to be adopted. <BR /> <BR />I would be concerned if Mr Agnew's amendments were made. Let us reflect on our experiences. Look at the recent experience of two years of deadlock and the financial penalties that preceded the Bill before it reached this stage.”
“There will be occasions when the Committee will seek further briefings or clarification from the Department and, as onerous as that may be, I hope that any requests will be met obligingly and in a spirit of cooperation. <BR /> <BR />I turn to some of the amendments in the group. Mr Agnew is, effectively, seeking to change the Assembly's control of all the subordinate legislation flowing from the Bill from confirmatory to affirmative resolution. I have to say that I have a degree of understanding and sympathy for that position. The problem with the confirmatory method is that the regulations can be brought into operation months before the Assembly formally confirms them. You could argue in such cases that this has been a deficit of democratic engagement with what are effectively new laws.”
“I welcome this opportunity to comment on the fifth and final group of amendments to the Bill. There have long been concerns about the scope of the Bill, not least because so much of it is simply enabling legislation. Much of the detail and the real policy changes are yet to be disclosed. That is why a number of amendments that could have been addressed in subordinate regulations were tabled at this stage. However, once the Bill passes Final Stage, the Assembly will have much less opportunity for direct input. <BR /> <BR />It is important that we recognise that the Committees have an important role to play in the process, and that the Social Development Committee, which I have recently been appointed to, will have a particularly important role. It is essential that the Minister and his Department adopt a cooperative attitude.”
“Will the Member agree with me that it is also unfortunate that he has not taken part in any of the extensive debate to share his views with other Members?”
“As a recent addition to the membership of the Social Development Committee, I still have to find my way and get a sense of whether that is a role that the Committee itself should be carrying out. If it finds that that is too large a task, there are other mechanisms in the Assembly to create bodies, whether it is a subcommittee or an Ad Hoc Committee. I do not feel that there is a need to put that in primary legislation so I am unconvinced of the need for amendment No 55. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the discussion that there has been on amendment No 56. There needs to be clarity on that issue. Whether or not the amendment is needed, it is useful that there is dialogue and clarity. If that can be achieved without legislation, that is fine, but it is something that we may need to return to, and I welcome the discussion that has commenced.”
“It would be helpful if the Minister would highlight the merits of whatever additional reporting would flow from amendment No 47. <BR /> <BR />I now turn to amendment No 46, which would, I think, have been very uncontentious — adding the Minister of Justice to the list of qualifying persons. With policing, courts and probation coming under that Minister, clearly there will be relevant information that could affect aspects of an individual's welfare payments and therefore it is entirely appropriate to make that addition. <BR />I turn to amendment No 55 and the idea of putting into primary legislation the establishment of another Committee, I point out that there are other mechanisms. The Assembly itself can decide to do that. Ad Hoc Committees can be established.”
“<BR /> <BR />I now turn to amendment No 20, which, I hear is not going to be moved. I am pleased, because of the concern I had about how it would have delayed the whole scheme and the almost automatic penalties that would have removed further money from the block grant. I therefore thank the proposers for indicating that they do not intend to move the amendment and for their support for our own pilot. <BR /> <BR />For now, the Ulster Unionist Party is more inclined to go with what the Minister proposes on reporting following the Bill in amendment No 47. It appears to be sufficiently robust and wide-ranging and will include what we believe to be the key points. I believe that the Department already produces regular reports on the impact of welfare reform.”
“That is why the wording of our amendment is not overly prescriptive. I recognise the Minister's commitment to a pilot and, as far as the Ulster Unionist Party is concerned, we want to work productively with him and his Department and officials. <BR /> <BR />I understand that the Department has already provisionally put in place some preparations for a pilot and that the intention will be to run it from the end of the summer. That will focus on reviewing what the impacts would have been on recent DLA claimants. I ask the Minister to provide some details of what the Department is currently considering, in particular, what approach is the pilot likely to take, how many people is it likely to involve and whether it will be based on a particular area or demography or be more wide-ranging.”
“<BR /> <BR />In the meantime, I believe that the implementation of a targeted pilot scheme in Northern Ireland will play a crucial role in testing and implementing the policy here. Testing the training of our staff and the processes would be wise. Not only does our proposed pilot scheme allow for the Department to learn lessons and obtain early estimates of the likely outcomes for claimants, it will hopefully shape future roll-out plans. <BR /> <BR />Preparation will be absolutely essential, and the more issues that we can resolve now before the full roll-out, possibly later this year, the better. Because of time pressures and the eagerness to avoid any further financial penalties from Westminster, my party agrees that the pilot should not delay the overall proposed roll-out scheme.”
“<BR /> <BR />The United Kingdom Government had previously made it clear that it would take time to get the delivery of personal independence payments (PIPs) right, by allowing a sufficient period for the processes to bed in. The theory was that they hoped to learn from the delivery of a limited number of new claims before increasing their volume and beginning to invite existing DLA claimants to claim PIP. <BR /> <BR />Unfortunately, trying to move even a limited number of people who have a change in their circumstances has been troubled with one problem after another. Many of these teething problems should now have been addressed, and the Department here should be in a position to learn from those when it comes to the task of assessing and transferring DLA claims to PIP.”
“I certainly had not heard reports of any pilots. I thank the Minister for that information. It certainly would be the first pilot to occur in Northern Ireland. Hopefully, that will be a useful exercise, where, locally, lessons may be learned on top of lessons that have been learnt elsewhere. <BR /> <BR />That was one of the key Ulster Unionist requests during the Stormont House talks. I welcome the genuine commitment of the Minister and his Department to take this issue forward. Whilst the Bill, at present, does provide for universal credit pilots, no such provision exists for the transfer from DLA to PIP. That, in our opinion, was a major oversight in the original legislation. Unfortunately, Great Britain has seen the consequence of that as it has begun to implement the new policy.”
“I am pleased to propose amendment No 34, which requires the Department to carry out a pilot scheme into personal independence payments; something that will be a first for any region in the United Kingdom. Hopefully, lessons can be learned before any wider roll-out. I am glad that this amendment appears to have had widespread support from a number of Members already. I think that there is a lot of logic to it.”
“It is for that reason that we need to think carefully. I argue that we should retain the same levels and guidance as elsewhere so that those who want to work are attracted to Northern Ireland, not those who may want to join the benefits system.”
“Potentially, we would attract many more claimants to join the benefits system at the risk of incurring much of the cost that will flow from their living in Northern Ireland, not to mention the resulting pressures on housing and on a whole range of services.”
“<BR /> <BR />I would be fearful of the consequences of the amendment were it to be accepted. Very quickly, we would put our entitlement for support on a different footing from the rest of the UK in the eyes of EU nationals. We all must welcome EU citizens who come to Northern Ireland to work, so long as they strive to provide for themselves and their families. They frequently contribute to the local economy by filling many jobs that might not otherwise be filled by locals. We do not, however, want to become a magnet for those who come to the UK not to work, but for benefits. If Northern Ireland had that variation, we would risk becoming a gateway to the United Kingdom for those who wish to enter the benefits system.”
“We have listened to the concerns that European Economic Area nationals, including those with disabilities, will be subject to work-related tests, when, in some circumstances, British nationals in the same situations will not. First, we need to remember that paragraph 7 in schedule 1 has been lifted entirely from the Bill that applies to the rest of the United Kingdom. It is, therefore, wrong in principle for anyone to claim that this Assembly is seeking a licence to discriminate. More importantly, however, we need to remember that our social security system is already not fully open to immigrants from other EU states. Instead, entitlement is very often based on whether the applicant has a right to reside here, and that is assessed through the habitual residency test.”
“The danger, of course, is that a culture of worklessness can quickly build up in homes and be passed on from generation to generation. Universal credit is at least trying to rectify that. However, amendment No 73 would take away the incentive for people who are declaring themselves as self-employed to try to increase their paid income. I can see why, initially, there may be concerns about setting a minimum income floor, but we need to be pragmatic. Claimants should be encouraged to undertake work that makes them money, rather than only keeping them occupied from day to day. <BR /> <BR />Similarly, we oppose amendment No 75. This has been a live issue right from the moment when the Assembly started considering the first draft Bill in 2012.”
“Prompt resolutions are absolutely essential, and we hope that the new commissioner will recognise the urgency of the environment in which the new scheme will be operating. We trust that this will be kept under review. <BR /> <BR />That brings us to the last two amendments in this group. We have no hesitation whatsoever in opposing amendment No 73. I wonder whether the full range of potential consequences of that amendment were considered before it was tabled. The strapline built up during the early discussions of welfare reform was that people should always be better off in work than on benefits. We agree with that as a broad policy priority. For too long, people were trapped in a system of welfare dependency that did not benefit them financially to go out and find a job.”
“I thank the Member for drawing that previous requirement to Members' attention. I think that has been very helpful. <BR /> <BR />Moving on, we are satisfied with amendment Nos 51 and 52 in which the Minister proposes to replace the old discretionary elements of the social fund, such as crisis loans and community care grants, with a new discretionary support scheme. It is essential that this new scheme works effectively and efficiently, and that the people it supports, who are likely to be some of the poorest and most vulnerable in our society, find that help and support in a timely fashion. Teething problems with the new system must be avoided as far as possible. People looking to avail themselves of this scheme will often not be able to wait around for a decision because their lives are in crisis.”
“I will stress again that the tabling of the petition of concern is particularly bad-mannered after what was discussed at yesterday's meeting of the five parties. Before determining whether we move amendment No 48, I will listen carefully to what the Minister has to say.”
“I think that it would be useful if there was a requirement for the Department to monitor what is being done and to ensure that that support is being delivered on a wide range of subjects, and, therefore, I believe that there is merit in the proposal. There need not necessarily be huge additional costs, but someone needs to spend some time looking very carefully at what level of advice and support is available to claimants and to ensure that all areas are covered. I am not entirely sure why the DUP is so threatened by that proposal that it felt it necessary to table a petition of concern to kill it. One thing that is for sure is that it is not the confident boost from the Department that many advice organisations were hoping to see today.”
“We can all think of our local offices in our towns, and I think of how the citizens advice bureaux in Carrickfergus, Larne and Newtownabbey contribute and help the system run smoothly. I certainly do not believe that they in any way undermine the work carried out by the Social Security Agency offices. They often complement them. Our amendment would simply give it a statutory footing. It would not necessarily mean more money; it may mean some. It would not mean more bureaucracy. In fact, I expect that, if our amendment is supported and approved, the only difference will be that it will help focus minds in the Department to ensure that there are no blind spots in terms of advice, either from it or from the independent sector across Northern Ireland. With that statutory requirement, it would have to do that.”
“More people would be submitting inaccurate or erroneous claims. Many might be unable to claim their entitlement, and, quite possibly, there would be gridlock in the system and severe hardship for many.”
“If we start moving benefits in or out of the overall cap, it will inevitably lead to an unequal system between us and the rest of the UK. If the cap needs to be changed, it should be changed for the entire UK. Again, the amendment would have a clear and not insignificant financial implication, that is, additional cost to our limited block grant and the additional loss of public services. <BR /> <BR />I am aware that amendment No 48, from the Ulster Unionist Party, has generated quite a bit of interest, not least in the independent advice sector. Let me make it clear that I understand that the Department, on the whole, provides support to the independent advice sector. However, that is because it is absolutely essential that it does. Without independent advice, fewer people would be claiming their fair entitlement.”
“<BR /> <BR />Amendment No 42 from the SDLP is, I believe, a very genuine attempt to try to retain some influence on what we all accept is an important matter but to which, at present, we have limited local feed-in. The benefit cap was a key DFP policy and one which my party has, on the whole, generally supported. Nevertheless, I think that the SDLP means well with its proposal of exempting some key supports, especially child benefit and carer's allowance. It is my opinion that carers are already facing financial hardship and difficulties, not least with what happens to them when they reach pension age and the caring component comes to an end. <BR /> <BR />However, this is not the place to try to make these changes, and I would argue that it should be done at Westminster.”