Peter Robinson
East Belfast · Democratic Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“Although we do not always fully appreciate it, devolution underpins a level of peace and stability that we enjoy today. After 35 years of stop-go government, devolution, with local people taking the decisions, is once again the norm.”
“Mr Speaker, it is a great pleasure and a huge honour for me, in carrying out my last duty as nominating officer for the Democratic Unionist Party, to nominate my good friend and successor as party leader, Mrs Arlene Foster, to be First Minister of Northern Ireland.”
“We have agreed significant reforms to the way in which government operates, with a reduction in the number of Departments and Assembly Members and the creation of an official opposition.”
“<BR /> <BR />Politics, by its nature, is a combative endeavour and we do not always take time to recognise the role that others play. I differ from some in the House on many issues but, in my long experience in politics, there are very few who are not well motivated and who do not act in the best interests of society as they see it.”
“Every new institution composed of politicians who have known nothing other than being in opposition will have a learning curve while Members mature, develop and adapt to taking responsibility and while the more sensible ones adjust their ambitions to fit the politics of what, with effort, is achievable.”
“Through good times and bad, we have worked together, despite our many differences in background, temperament and outlook. Strangely, we were at our strongest when the threat from outside the political institutions was at its greatest.”
The complete record
Every one of 393 lines we hold for Peter Robinson, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 8.
“Could he tell us how you sow what you reap? I thought that you reaped what you sowed.”
“Mr Speaker, with your permission, I will ask my colleague junior Minister Jonathan Bell to answer this question.”
“Hansard will show that he said that, of the £80 million, there was only £6 million-odd in his area, clearly implying that a very small amount of the £80 million had been assigned to his area. There was a division among the zones. We have had countless discussions in the Assembly since then, and nobody has complained that we got the division of that money across the zones out of kilter. <BR /> <BR />Of course, we want it to happen as quickly as possible. If the Member wants to write to me or to see me about any particular project in his constituency, I am happy to bring forward our officials or, indeed, officials from the Department of Finance and Personnel to discuss the stage the issue is at and what can be done to speed up any particular project.”
“I am at one with him in wanting to speed the process up, but it is important that we have the proper checks in place, because we are dealing with public money and we want to ensure that it is used properly.”
“The Member should look at the precise wording that he uses and choose his language more carefully. He said that, of the £80 million, only six point whatever it was had been allocated to his area. There was not £80 million for his area; the £80 million was for the whole of Northern Ireland, both capital and revenue. A small fraction of that was for each of the zones. I am glad to hear from him that the commitments have already been made in his area. A lot of this is rolling out much more slowly than we want or are comfortable with. I have two cases from my advice centre on Friday that I intend to raise with colleagues about the slow movement in either the Department of Finance and Personnel or OFMDFM.”
“As I indicated in response to the Member's first question, the five-party agreement at Stormont Castle was much more detailed and precise than the four-party agreement. I think that I can do better: I can confirm to the House that at 1.55 pm, before I came into the Chamber, I ensured that a copy of the Stormont Castle agreement was placed in the Library of the Assembly. Therefore, Members will be able to look at the question raised by the Member and satisfy themselves as to what the correct response should be.”
“We would do well to remember that, while there was a four-party agreement, ultimately, we agreed a five-party agreement that was much more detailed and had much more meat on the bones than the four-party agreement had.”
“I could not believe what I was hearing. If the Member were to do what she should do at the speed that she should do it, I would not like to be standing between her and the confessional. For anybody to suggest, as she did, that her party had not endorsed either the four-party agreement or the five-party agreement is totally misleading. Indeed, the facts go beyond simply agreeing around a table. Five party leaders took that document collectively to Stormont House where we sold the idea to the Secretary of State and she, in turn, to the Prime Minister. Do not let any party try to wheedle its way out of agreements that were reached by us all at Stormont Castle.”
“The one thing that I can be absolutely certain about is that, on the principle that you never ask a question unless you know the answer, the Member knows the background details to the issue, and those facts are accurate. I am somewhat disappointed by the attitude of some parties in the Assembly to welfare reform. We should rejoice that we have managed to resolve an issue that had very real and destructive abilities for the future of the Assembly. Instead of reaching an agreement one day and trying to renegotiate it or vote against it or pretend to people outside that you are not really in favour of it, we would all be far better recognising our responsibilities and moving forward with an agreement that we reached. <BR /> <BR />I listened open-mouthed to the SDLP Member for Upper Bann, Dolores Kelly, on a programme at the weekend.”
“I think that one can see the circumstances that they faced, so I hope that there is greater awareness of the impact on very real individuals. If it is right for those who point the finger towards Turkey to do so, it is also right for those who look closer to home.”
“I am sure that the Member, like me, rejoices in the fact that the Member of the European Parliament who made those remarks now recognises the hurt that is caused to families who are not aware of the whereabouts or details of their loved ones who were disappeared. I met recently the McConville family, and I have to say that it was a very sobering and serious occasion. Here was not just one life lost because of murder and the difficulties that arose from that in relation to the body not being discovered for many, many years, but the lives of the family in many ways ruined. They were separated at a young age, ending up in care and then finding themselves in circumstances where they were abused as children.”
“Our history in Northern Ireland shows us that, no matter how hard we try, the past comes back to trip us up. Therefore, it became vital, when we sat down to deal with a series of issues in the Stormont House discussions, that we tried sensibly to reach agreements where they were possible in relation to the past. I am glad that we have reached a series of agreements on how we address those issues and how we can give some hope to victims that they can be heard, their grievances can be properly pursued and we can seek to get at the truth.”
“I trust that people will respond to the consultation and indicate that there are better ways for us to take forward expressions of culture than simply through an Irish language Act that would have massive expenditure attached to it if we were to go down that road.”
“I am saying that the Member should be aware of the distinction between a consultation document and a decision. Any controversial decision has to be taken by the Executive, and any Minister is required to bring it to the Executive. We have a rule that no Minister is restricted in any way from going out with a consultation document. Each Minister must decide for himself or herself the best uses of resources in their Department and the likelihood of their consultation being agreeable when it comes back by way of a strategy. That is a decision that each Minister must make. I have not changed my position on the issue, and nor has my party.”
“There is to be no change in the direction of any of the programmes as a result of the reduction from 12 Departments to nine. The same level of enthusiasm will still be there. In many cases, it will be the same people in Departments who will be moving across to carry out the same work. Reorganisation should not affect in any way how that work is carried out. I know that there will be concerns for some if a particular sector's name does not appear in the title of a Department, but whatever the departmental names turn out to be, I can give an absolute assurance that that will not in any way dilute the work that is being carried out or the importance that the Executive attach to it.”
“The reduction in the number of Civil Service Departments and the reorganisation of their functions is a Programme for Government commitment. We believe that it is an important step towards having a more efficient Civil Service. The reorganisation should not be interpreted as a change of Executive priorities. It is important to remember that all existing functions will continue to be delivered and resourced in the new departmental context. We fully recognise the importance of culture, arts and the creative industries; indeed, we are proud of the esteem in which this sector is held throughout the world. 'Game of Thrones', for example, is a phenomenal success, and 'Boogaloo and Graham' winning the short film category at the BAFTAs last week is testimony to Northern Ireland's successful film industry.”
“I think that we need to be careful that we do not create a problem for the Bill as it might come forward. The issue will not be the definition of "victim". The issue will be about the eligibility criteria that are set down. There are tens of thousands of victims, and only 300 to 350 of those are likely to be entitled. It is those who are defined, even under existing law, as being victims who are eligible to go forward for the pension. I think that the consultation document that my friend has already published indicates the view that we take on those matters. There are others who have another view, and clearly the Assembly is going to have to decide on that, but I have no doubt that the Member and I will probably be in the same Lobby on the issue.”
“I received a delegation some months ago, and I suspect that its figures were right at that time. Somewhere in the region of 300 to 350 people were considered to be likely and eligible, if the criteria were similar to what was initially set out in the consultation document put forward by my friend.”
“Yes, I am aware of the details set out by the Member, and I commend her for her initiative in bringing forward a private Member's Bill. Knowing her background, I know that she feels very strongly about these issues and is keen to do everything that she can to assist. I do not expect anything less from the officials in OFMDFM. Obviously, there are political issues that they will not involve themselves in, but the Department will, of course, cooperate in any way that it can on the background information that she needs for her Bill.”
“The Stormont House Agreement sets out our commitment to look at the proposal for a pension for physically injured victims. Significant background work has already been completed on many elements of a proposed pension. The Victims' Commission has been tasked with providing a research report on the issues, and that has now been received by us. However, the report did not deal with eligibility, other than to look at types and levels of injury. That matter remains outstanding, and it is likely that it will be challenging to find consensus on it. Officials in our Department are considering all the issues that need to be addressed in relation to the introduction of a proposal for a pension for severely physically injured victims.”
“Let us look at the international companies that are already here and which will increase their investment in Northern Ireland. Look at the indigenous companies that will be able to use the increased profits that they can hold on to in order to invest further and expand their business. That means more jobs and more spending power. All of those are the positive aspects that economists have recognised could bring about 50,000 additional jobs to Northern Ireland. Perhaps we can get our chins off the ground and start looking at the positive side of bringing corporation tax powers to Northern Ireland, rather than always talking about the doom and gloom of our economy. This is a good news story.”
“I think that the Treasury will recognise that there is volatility, in that the level of profit that any company makes depends on a number of international events, some known and some not known. Clearly, there is that level of volatility, and the Treasury will want us to have in place a reserve fund to deal with that. We are looking at that issue, which, I suspect, will require us to have available a fund of somewhere in the region of £100 million. I just wish that, if we are to go down the road of looking at corporation tax, people would not always look at one column and not the other. Let us look at the positives — the benefits that flow from corporation tax. Let us look at the additional jobs that can be brought into Northern Ireland.”
“Of course, the decisions on all of these matters were ultimately decisions of Her Majesty's Government; they were not decisions of the Northern Ireland Executive. However, it was his party that gave up and his party that surrendered on the issue. It was his party leader who stood in the Assembly and told us to move on and forget it, asking what plan B was and telling us that we were not going to get it. It was this party that stood by its commitment; it was this party that continued to try; and it was this party that succeeded in getting the commitments from Her Majesty's Government. He would be much better standing up in his place and congratulating us for what we have achieved than emphasising the fact that he failed, because he was the one who walked away from a commitment to get power over corporation tax for Northern Ireland.”
“The indications from the last briefing that we were given are, happily, that it is now clear that that will be phased in over three years, with a likely reduction from our block grant of between £100 million and £150 million in the first year. That makes it much more doable. It means that we would not face the final and larger figure until about 2019-2020, which Treasury forecasts and modelling suggest as the time when we should be coming out of the period of austerity, and when we would get the full benefit of the changes under the Stormont House Agreement for the streamlining of our services and the costs in Northern Ireland. They would put us in a much better position to be able to endure that reduction in our block grant.”
“The deputy First Minister and I have met the chief executive of Invest Northern Ireland and people from the Department of Finance and Personnel. It is fairly clear from an Invest Northern Ireland point of view that we would waste a massive opportunity if we were to wait until 1 April 2017, which is the date on which it could be in force in Northern Ireland. The potential for us to sell two years without any cost to our Budget would be lost if we were to wait until then. The advice from Invest Northern Ireland is that we should decide as soon as possible what the rate and the date should be, and give a clear commitment that we intend to keep that level of corporation tax for a long term. <BR /> <BR />Previously, the fear was that we would be faced with a bill in the region of £325 million for the first year of its operation.”
“However, as we already have a very strong talent pool, the economic benefit will be seen in advance of that date as indigenous companies and inward investors will increase their investment levels in anticipation of a rate reduction.”
“Developing corporation tax-setting powers is a key commitment in the Programme for Government, as a wide range of evidence has shown that there is significant economic benefit to lowering the rate in Northern Ireland. While the legislation to transfer responsibility for the tax continues to progress through Parliament, consultation events are being held with key stakeholders on the technical aspects of the Bill. We remain confident that the legislation is on track to receive Royal Assent before the general election. Further preparations to reflect the changes in the legislation will then be required by HMRC and tax software suppliers, so a reduction in the rate will not be introduced until at least April 2017.”
“Of course we work with the Government on international development. We also have an Assembly group on international development — I think that there have been some changes in that group — and we want to continue to work with it. We are working on an international development statement that I expect to come forward fairly soon. No matter what we say about how difficult times are in Northern Ireland, there are shades of poverty. If people think that we are having difficult times and that there are people in poverty in Northern Ireland, they should visit or look at other parts of the globe, and they will see the massive need that there is. In a region that has a relative abundance, we do well to remember those who are in much greater need than ourselves.”
“If any of our Members are on any foreign journey, it would be useful if they would call into the embassy in the area to discover for themselves how much that embassy is doing to tell the story of Northern Ireland and to report back to us.”
“Nobody can do it better than ourselves. That is why, in the key areas, we have set up our own offices. For investment, there is a massive advantage in using Invest Northern Ireland's facilities, and we do that right around the globe. Everywhere we go, we visit the embassies. We seek to discover the extent to which they have promotional literature that helps Northern Ireland. It is not always the case, and perhaps we should pay more attention to ensure that all the embassies at least have the various documentation that they need, such as investment strategies and information on our education sector and others. It is not simply a case of the embassy selling Northern Ireland; we need to sell ourselves to the embassy.”
“<BR /> <BR />In international relations, we use not only the fixed offices that we have with the bureaux in Washington and Europe, and now the office in Beijing, but we avail ourselves of the opportunity to use the various Invest Northern Ireland bases around the world and, where necessary, embassies.”
“We have an international relations strategy and want to make an international development statement. Much work has to be done on international development, and we are working with the Committee in that respect. The international relations working group was established, I think, back in July last year as part of the Executive's strategy. Each Department is represented on the group. Its aim is to coordinate the international activity of Ministers and Departments to develop a corporate approach. That includes establishing communication links to best share information, the coordination of future international travel and diplomatic events and agreeing a set of key corporate messages. It continues to work, and we continue to improve our international relations.”
“Within the framework of our international relations strategy, the deputy First Minister and I will continue to promote Northern Ireland as a great place to do business and to visit.”
“The deputy First Minister and I are looking forward to meeting key decision-makers and business executives when we travel to the United States next month to highlight the benefits of a competitive rate of corporation tax. <BR /> <BR />Our relationship with China represents an exciting opportunity for Northern Ireland. The Beijing bureau opened for business in September last year. We are already starting to see the benefits of direct government-to-government relations in the work of Invest Northern Ireland, the agrifood industry and the third-level education sector. The Chinese Government's plans to open a consulate general in Northern Ireland, based in Belfast, are at an advanced stage. That is further evidence of the growing confidence and mutual understanding between Northern Ireland and China.”
“The Executive's international relations strategy sets out a clear framework for our engagement internationally over the coming years. It aims to enhance Northern Ireland's international credibility and develop mutually beneficial relations with targeted regions around the world. Securing investment, improving trade and attracting tourists and international students to Northern Ireland are key to the strategy. <BR /> <BR />Our offices in Brussels, Washington and now Beijing play a major role in our international outreach. The work of the Washington bureau is establishing and developing important relationships with senior US Government representatives and has been integral to Invest Northern Ireland's unprecedented success in attracting US investment here.”
“With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will ask junior Minister Jonathan Bell to answer that question.”
“The only reason that the Member did not get an answer is that, if you have an agreement that is a five-party agreement, no one party can decide for itself that it is going to publish it. I am very happy that it is published, but you need the agreement of all five parties.”
“I am grateful to the Member for giving way. Will he explain to the House the narrative that us placing something in legislation puts some onus, responsibility or obligation on the United Kingdom Government not to touch us? It is a nonsense. If we put something in legislation, the only people who will be under an obligation will be those on the Executive here in Northern Ireland. Nobody else.”
“I have no difficulty in having continual monitoring and observation of how the welfare reform proposals are working out, and that will inform any future decisions that we have to take. However, that is a matter for the Assembly, not one for this debate or legislation. <BR /> <BR />I hope that, when my colleague indicates, as he no doubt will, that the various amendments that are down in this category can be better dealt with in a different manner, Members will accept that, keep to the agreements that they reached, be honourable Members of the Assembly and stick to the deal that they have done.”
“<BR /> <BR />I say to the SDLP that, for this set of amendments, I think that the Minister made a very powerful argument yesterday that, in terms of data protection and the flexibility that departmental guidance gives, it is a much better to go forward rather than the Minister having to work around rigid legislation. It does not obviate the need for them to stand up, argue their case and press the Minister as to whether he is going to deal with various issues. <BR /> <BR />I say to the Member who is now talking to his colleague that I have no difficulty in supporting that kind of Committee, though it is not a matter for this legislation. You do not set up an Assembly Committee through DSD legislation.”
“The truth of it is this: if people genuinely want to move forward in Northern Ireland, it is important that this legislation goes through; that parties uphold the agreements that all of us reached at Stormont Castle; and that we move forward on that basis, because, if I ever have to sit down to negotiate again, I will look at the people I am negotiating with on the basis of whether they delivered on the last occasion and whether they were prepared to implement the last agreement that we reached. I trust that Members take that seriously, even if they have their fling today by putting forward amendments. I hope that, when the final votes are taken, we will have all Members going through the Lobbies in support of this legislation and, hopefully, therefore, bolstering the position that we have with this Assembly.”
“<BR /> <BR />Some Members might want to sit back — I perhaps direct this more at the SDLP than I do at others — and, à la carte, go through the Stormont House Agreement, saying, "We will have a bit of that, not so much of that and maybe a bit more of that would be nice". However, that is not the way that you honourably implement an agreement. Of course, if you are a smaller party and your votes are not required to get a majority from both sections of our community in the Lobbies, you can have that luxury of pretending to be in opposition when you know that nothing will come from your words.”
“Here, very clearly, anybody who would vote against the Budget or welfare reform is voting against the introduction of corporation tax-setting powers for Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />The second impact that it would have is this: if Members cast their mind back to the period before the Stormont House negotiations, they will recall that this Assembly was going down. Make no mistake about it: the disagreements were such that they could not be resolved, and the financial cost of welfare would have been at such a level that we could not have sustained an Executive because such a significant sum of money would be being taken away from key front-line services.”
“I trust that the Member will be man enough to admit that his remarks were inaccurate and that it was nonsensical of him to put forward the free-for-all argument because you simply would not have an agreement. <BR />I remind him that the consequences of not having this agreement are twofold. Number one is that it was tied in directly to the devolution of corporation tax. We had to get the Budget and welfare reform resolved. If one were to listen to the Member and some of his party on television, one would hear them claim to be in the vanguard and the promoters of corporation tax. Mind you, I can recall the leader of their party telling us that we had to move on to plan B and that corporation tax power was not coming to the devolved institution. That is what we were told.”
“If you put forward a proposition that somehow you have a Stormont House Agreement and then you have a free-for-all in the Assembly, you will not have an agreement. Who told us that best of all? Who was the one who spelled that out for us all? It was none other than the leader of his party. <BR /> <BR />He will remember — if he does not remember, I will remind him — that his leader berated Sinn Féin, the SDLP and everybody else and said that this is not a case of renegotiating these matters: if you try to renegotiate, it will unravel. Does the Member remember what his leader said? That is exactly what would happen if we put the agreement out for a free-for-all in the Assembly. What we are here to do is to honour the agreement that we reached with the other parties at Stormont Castle and later endorsed at Stormont House.”
“No: I would not accept that that is what the Member was doing. I was here listening to the Member berate these Benches for being undemocratic and putting down a petition of concern against all the amendments. If the Member reads Hansard, he will see it. <BR /> <BR />Let us explore his argument that somehow each Member should be free to decide for himself what the outcome of any amendment should be . If we carried that to its logical conclusion, we would not have an agreement. My colleagues are asked to go through the Lobbies on things that, in short, they would prefer not to go through the Lobbies on — not on this Bill so much, but on other aspects of the Stormont House Agreement. The whole thing about an agreement is that you agree to give a bit in one area to take a lot in another. That is what agreement is about.”
“I just cannot understand how a petition of concern affects that in any way, because a petition of concern that included an amendment that was going to be withdrawn or not moved would have no impact. If you do not have a vote on it, the petition of concern is not relevant. The two issues on which there was five-party agreement on the change are not included in the petition of concern, and therefore the comments that he made were totally inaccurate. I will give way to the honourable Member.”
“He considered the other four amendments that they had put down to be probing amendments, and I think that he is right. It is a strategy that is often used in other debating chambers where Members want to pin the Minister down to putting something in Hansard on how an issue will be handled. These were probing amendments on which the Minister was quite happy to give a satisfactory explanation, and he made that clear at yesterday's meeting. On that basis, the leader of the Ulster Unionist Party indicated that the party would withdraw or not move its amendment depending on where it was situated in a group. <BR /> <BR />All the issues raised by the Ulster Unionist Party were dealt with.”
“I will give the Member a bit more to answer to and then I will give way to him. <BR /> <BR />The leader of his party came forward with six amendments that were agreed during yesterday's meeting of the implementation group, in the full spirit of what I would have expected from him and from the Ulster Unionist Party that they would have the two amendments brought forward, which the rest of the group — the other four parties — agreed with and agreed that we would go through the Lobbies in support of, if it is necessary to do so if they are not agreed on a voice call, and that we would support those two amendments.”
“It had six amendments that it wanted to make to the Bill. Regarding the remarks made by the Member for East Antrim Mr Beggs, I will give him the benefit of the doubt and say that perhaps somebody wrote his speech. I noticed that he was reading, so I suspect that somebody wrote his speech and that he was reading out the research of somebody else. If he had actually read what he was going to say beforehand, he would know that it was inaccurate. I am sure that he, as a Deputy Speaker, read the petition of concern that went into the Speaker's Office, and I am sure that he saw that the two Ulster Unionist amendments — amendment Nos 34 and 35 — were not included in the petition of concern, yet he told the House that we had a petition of concern to block all amendments, which was not the case. We had agreed at the —”