Jim Allister
MP for North Antrim · Traditional Unionist Voice · United Kingdom
“There is a certain irony in the title of this debate: domestic farming. In one part of the United Kingdom, we are governed not by domestic laws but by foreign EU laws. Does the hon.”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“What should I say to my constituent, a stage 4 cancer patient, who applied for his civil service pension in April and has heard nothing? What should I say to him about the fact that, as his Member of Parliament, I wrote about his case to the Cabinet Office on 26 August—two months ago today—and have equally had no reply and heard nothing?”
House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Home Secretary talked positively about reducing the number of illegal migrants coming in by small boats. Could I ask her, though, what actual steps the Government are taking to thwart illegal migration to the United Kingdom across the open border from the Republic of Ireland into Northern Ireland?”
House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“How does the Secretary of State think victims of the Provisional IRA felt when they heard the Police Service of Northern Ireland confirm that the provos still exist and that the Chief Constable, and perhaps the Secretary of State, were influenced on Drumcree by the feelings of the Provisional IRA?”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is by drawing such preferences that the Secretary of State has caused the Bill to suffer from both a lack of balance and a lack of appreciation and support across the entire community.”
House of Commons20 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Secretary of State is not known for selling himself short, but even he would have to acknowledge that the Bill he has produced and amended has fallen well short of universal acclaim. It has unimpressed a lot of people and interests.”
House of Commons20 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
985 held · 663 searchable for Jim Allister. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 10.
This is not an official version of UK Parliament proceedings. It reproduces the published record and links to it; the official version is the one UK Parliament publishes.
“I think all that is self-evident, but sadly, we have a Government who are deaf to those issues, and sadly, the hon. Member’s party seems to have come to terms with them, because in Stormont, the DUP is now prepared to implement the Irish sea border and the Windsor framework, but let me be very clear: the integrity of our single market has been utterly destroyed. Among the practical consequences of that are unimaginable levels of trade diversion. We were once a wholly integrated part of the United Kingdom. Once barriers are erected, trade is discouraged. Various surveys show that that has happened. From the Federation of Small Businesses survey, we know that 34% of GB companies that used to trade with Northern Ireland have ceased trading. Why? Because this paperwork and this checking is such a disincentive that it is not worth the bother.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“There is lamentable and demonstrable trade diversion, but the Government are blind and deaf to the issue, refusing to act. The challenge to the Minister is this: why, in the face of demonstrable trade diversion, is that other part of the Windsor framework—article 16—not being implemented?”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I absolutely agree. The hon. Member makes a valid point. Some might say, “Well, what does trade diversion matter? As long as you get the goods, does it matter where they have come from?” Of course, the corollary of trade diversion is what it is doing to our economic links. It is consciously and deliberately building an all-island economy. In place of Northern Ireland being a fully integrated part of the UK economy, the whole idea of trade diversion—indeed, the whole idea of the protocol and the Windsor framework—was to build the stepping stone to an all-island economy, to step us out of the United Kingdom. And that is what is happening. When the Windsor framework was introduced, it contained article 16. It promised that if there were any trade diversion, the Government would step in and sort it out with the EU.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Indeed, if it had anything but the political purpose that lies behind it, we would not have all this paraphernalia. We are in the appalling situation where local businesses, particularly those that depend on GB-Northern Ireland trade, have no help from the Government and are having to set up their own Intertrade UK business association to try to highlight these issues. I am grateful for the work they have done and the statistics they have provided; thankfully, at least they are trying to look after our interests, in sharp contrast to this Government.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If we are a United Kingdom, why oh why are we denying to my part of the United Kingdom and that of my colleagues the most fundamental tenet of being a United Kingdom—namely, unfettered trade between and within all parts of the United Kingdom? It does not have to be like this. We could deal with the border issues with the EU through mutual enforcement—in other words, something relatively simple. It is a hallmark of international trade that if you are making goods for a foreign country, you make them to their standards and vice versa. That is the essence of mutual enforcement, with criminal sanction so that there is liability if that is not done. That is what protects each other’s markets. We do not need all this paraphernalia of the Windsor framework.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Indeed, if it had anything to do with it, it is in this context: the Belfast agreement created a scenario where cross-community consent was supposed to be the barometer for everything, yet when it came to the Windsor framework being imposed on and extended to Northern Ireland, the one thing in the Belfast agreement that was liquidated was cross-community consent. That was taken out so that the protocol could be extended, knowing that it did not and would not have cross-community consent. The Windsor framework makes a nonsense of the Belfast agreement argument by trashing the very core of it—namely, by removing cross-community consent. I come back to where I started.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The SPS deal is not a United Kingdom-EU deal; it is a GB-EU deal, leaving Northern Ireland utterly, totally, irreversibly under EU rules pertaining to everything of the nature of SPS. The SPS-GB deal means that, in addition to Northern Ireland being disenfranchised by being allowed to make the laws that flow under SPS, the whole United Kingdom is to be disenfranchised and Great Britain is to join us, unable to make laws about her own SPS arrangements. It is no silver bullet whatsoever. We might be told, as we are often foolishly told, “Oh, but it’s about protecting the Belfast agreement.” It has absolutely nothing to do with the Belfast agreement.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If a manufacturer coming to Northern Ireland is told it is wonderful that they can sell to GB and to the EU, they should ask where they are to get their raw materials. If they are told they should get their raw materials from Great Britain, they would have to pass through an international customs border. They might have to pay duties and do all the paperwork. Suddenly, the attraction of setting up in Northern Ireland as foreign direct investment disappears very fast. Any perceived advantage of dual market access is cancelled out by the Irish sea border itself. Many the Minister will tell us that the Government will do an SPS deal, which will solve many of these problems. Will it?”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Who would have thought that the EU single market was so delicate that it could not withstand the import into Northern Ireland of a bookmark? How preposterous and ridiculous is it that we have got to that point? I suspect that the Minister, in trying to excuse and wave this away, will tell us that we have the wonderful advantage of dual market access. What a fraud and con. Dual market access has amounted to nothing for Northern Ireland. We were told that dual market access would make Northern Ireland the Singapore of the west. Strange then, that in all the years of the Windsor framework there has not been a single incidence of foreign direct investment because of dual market access. That is for one very good reason.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Of course. The fact that 34% of businesses—many of them small—that previously serviced and supplied Northern Ireland have ceased, is obviously having a detrimental employment consequence for those firms in GB. It is not just big or small firms that are suffering but ordinary consumers. One of the most striking illustrations of that, particularly pertinent to this House, is that items purchased online from our own House of Commons shop cannot be delivered to Northern Ireland. It cannot supply to Northern Ireland because of the EU’s general product safety regulations. It is impossible to order a packet of House of Commons fudge, a leather folder, a candle, a keyring or a Christmas bauble—not even this bookmark I have here.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Minister will know, because I dealt with it at some length, about the issue of diversion of trade, which is illustrated by the fact that there has been a 75% fall in the tonnage of goods supplied by GB-registered vehicles into Northern Ireland. Does he accept that there is diversion of trade? If he does, when will the Government activate article 16 of the Windsor framework, which is supposed to be a protection against it?”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Ministers from the Northern Ireland Office talk rather glibly about these matters, but the lived reality of the supply chain is very different: a full international customs border that is now inflicting damage on the import of steel; tightening import control system 2 checks; a parcels border; a plants border; and £192 million spent on building border posts—all to placate a European Union to which the Secretary of State and others seem totally beholden. When will the Secretary of State actually stand up for Northern Ireland? Can we please not have the usual trite reply that it is all the fault of Brexit, when it is the very opposite? The denial of Brexit is the altar upon which our supply chains are being sacrificed.”
House of Commons8 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I ask each Member whether they would do that to their constituents. Just think about that. Would members of this Committee impose on their constituents a foreign-drafted, designed and implemented law that means they cannot buy batteries made to the standard of their own country? That is the question.”
House of Commons8 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In fact, batteries made to United Kingdom standards will become illegal in a part of this United Kingdom, to the extent that a criminal sanction of imprisonment could be imposed for using a battery that meets UK standards. How absurd is it that in a part of this United Kingdom we are going to impose penalties on anyone daring to use a battery produced to UK standards? I am very disappointed that the primary concern of the Opposition spokesman, the hon. Member for Epping Forest, is why it took so long to enforce foreign jurisdiction on a part of the United Kingdom. That is a quite shocking observation. When my consumers buy an e-bike, an electric car or a simple battery, the Government say they cannot buy one that meets United Kingdom standards. That is what we are doing here.”
House of Commons8 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The narrative is quite clear: the 2006 EU regulation historically applied to all parts of the United Kingdom. After Brexit, however, when the EU amended the regulation in 2023, it ceased to apply to GB, where it has been revoked. But a part of this United Kingdom, namely Northern Ireland, is to continue to be subjected to foreign-made, unfiltered, unchecked law made by the EU. And the consequence is that my consumers in Northern Ireland can now only use and be supplied with batteries that meet that foreign diktat. Of course, the EU is infamous for micromanaging everyone’s economy if it can. We can now only use, import and deploy batteries made not to United Kingdom standards.”
House of Commons8 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Once more a Committee—and therefore this Parliament—has been asked to approve a regulation that has the effect of departing Northern Ireland from the UK legal framework governing the subject matter. Let us be clear: this Committee is being asked to nod through a regulation imposing a law that no parliamentarian in this United Kingdom made, scrutinised or had any hand in drafting. This Committee is being asked to nod through the imposition of a foreign rule—made by the European Parliament, not this Parliament—and to nod it through so that it is enforced with criminal sanction in a part of the United Kingdom, of which this is meant to be the sovereign Parliament that makes the laws and decides the criminal penalties. But no, we are here obeisantly to nod through a regulation to enforce foreign law on a part of the United Kingdom.”
House of Commons8 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Another aim in section 46 is “maintaining and strengthening the integrity and smooth operation of the internal market”. Therefore, even under the statutory test of section 46 of the Internal Market Act, these regulations fail, and they fail lamentably. I ask every self-respecting Member of this House simply to apply the test they would apply if this was being done to their constituents. They know that they would not do this to their constituents, so why do it to mine?”
House of Commons8 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It requires that in developing any regulations, these draft regulations included, the Government should have special regard to “the need to maintain Northern Ireland’s integral place in the…internal market”. They are not maintaining an integral place if they are applying different rules—foreign rules—to a part of the United Kingdom. Section 46 also states “the need to respect Northern Ireland’s place as part of the customs territory of the United Kingdom; and…the need to facilitate the free flow of goods between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, with the aim of…streamlining trade between Great Britain and Northern Ireland”. That is the very opposite of what these draft regulations will do. They will impede trade so that a battery cannot be bought from Great Britain.”
House of Commons8 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“You subject yourself to a similar disenfranchisement of your own electorate so that they do not elect the people who make the laws that govern them.’” That will be the ultimate outcome. On the laws governing the type and use of batteries, which is one of a vast number of areas where this is going to happen, the Government will say, “You, the electorate, are not worthy of electing people to make those laws. No, we are going to be colony-like, subjecting you to laws that someone else makes.” The hon. Member for Truro and Falmouth might think that is a good way forward, but I certainly do not. I remind the Government that section 46 of the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 is very clear.”
House of Commons8 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I certainly recognise that, once again, Northern Ireland is being used in the reset as a cover to realign the whole United Kingdom with the EU. That, of course, is the gameplan of this Government, and this is but a small example of how they are going to deploy it. They hide behind Northern Ireland and say, “Oh, well, we are doing it in this part of the United Kingdom, so we will all simply align ourselves to laws we do not make—laws we cannot change. We will impose upon the whole United Kingdom the disenfranchisement we have already imposed upon Northern Ireland, which cannot make laws on this because it is subject to foreign jurisdiction. We are now going to say to the whole United Kingdom, ‘You do the same.”
House of Commons8 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“May I first correct the Minister? I am not a DUP Member, and I am surprised she does not know that. Secondly, she is also wrong to say that we are debating the merits of this law, as we are not. This already is the law in Northern Ireland, courtesy not of this House but of the EU through sections 7 and 8 of the 2020 Act. It already is the law, so all we are discussing now is how far we are going to penalise people if they breach this foreign law. We are not discussing its merits. If the Government wanted to tackle unsafe batteries, they should have done so across the whole United Kingdom, and they have not—they are hiding behind Northern Ireland.”
House of Commons8 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Does it come as a surprise to the hon. Gentleman, if he is correct about the purpose of the Belfast agreement in that regard, that former terrorists who were elected continue to this very day to glorify and regularly celebrate their acts of terrorism? Surely that is not compatible with their having turned their backs on terrorism.”
House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“There cannot be any hiding behind what is euphemistically called the peace process in Northern Ireland to justify the elevation of terrorists, because peace came in Northern Ireland—I will correct some Members here—not because of the Belfast agreement but because our gallant security forces defeated the terrorists, who were then, sadly, able to win the peace and gain what they gained. With those thoughts, I strongly support the petition, and I salute those who brought it to the House.”
House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That is one of the dangers of allowing the elevation of terrorists into elected office. An act of terrorism is an act that deliberately takes on the political system to destroy it by the bomb and the bullet. It is wholly incongruous, given the definition of terrorism, to then have those terrorists, still boasting of their acts of terrorism, involved at the highest levels of that system. I come back to my first point. If the Government are to act on this petition, and they should, they need to act on a nationwide basis across the United Kingdom. We cannot have one rule for one and another for another.”
House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The second, chilling, abiding consequence of allowing terrorists to be elected is that it sends a very dangerous message to the next generation of people who might be tempted to tamper and get involved in terrorism, because what do they see? They see that it worked for the previous generation of terrorists. They end up in the highest offices in the land, so it incentivises rather than disincentivises the pursuit of terrorism. If young people, misled by dissident republicans in Northern Ireland, look at the Sinn Féin Benches and see multiple former terrorists presenting and parading as statespeople, having attained elected office, what message does it send to those young people? It sends a message that terrorism worked for them—“So why not for us?”, they might think.”
House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Member for Birmingham Northfield (Laurence Turner), we have a situation in Northern Ireland where regularly, weekend after weekend, elected representatives glorify acts of terrorism and salute the so-called bravery of those who were what they call freedom fighters and what the rest of us call vile terrorists. For example, to this very day the First Minister will regularly salute the memory of terrorists. She does that from a position of elected office, and that elevates, sanitises and justifies the very acts of those terrorists. That is the fallout of allowing terrorists to be elected to public office.”
House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“There are abiding lessons from the experience of Northern Ireland I must correct the hon. Member for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk (John Lamont), who said that Martin McGuinness had no convictions. Martin McGuinness was convicted twice by the Dublin criminal court of membership of the IRA, which is a terrorist offence. Yet he went on to become Deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland. There are two abiding consequences of allowing terrorists to be elevated to elected office. The first is that it sanitises the very acts of terrorism. As I said in my intervention on the hon.”
House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Yet he is a man who was once an MP, then a member of the Northern Ireland Assembly, and then a Minister in the Northern Ireland Executive. That is what happens when we do not fetter the rights of those who have taken up the bomb and the gun and we allow them to abuse the democratic process. I think of another continuing member of the Northern Ireland Assembly, Pat Sheehan, who got 24 years for an attempted booby-trap bomb. He still serves as an elected representative. I think of Paul Butler, who was convicted of the murder of a policeman. The Principal Deputy Speaker of the Northern Ireland Assembly, Carál Ní Chuilín, is a convicted terrorist. She was convicted for a booby-trap attack on a police station. There are many more besides. That illustrates what happens when we do not address an issue like this.”
House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“And more than that, he is to this day a member of the Northern Ireland Policing Board. Think of the absurdity of that: an Old Bailey bomber sitting in judgment over a police service on the Northern Ireland Policing Board. If the Government ever act as they should, they must take action across this United Kingdom to prevent all those with terrorist convictions from attaining office. Of course, Kelly is not alone. There are many more, including Conor Murphy, a man who was elected to this House. He has never served here, because Sinn Féin refuse to take their seats, but he still got all the expenses of this House. He is a man who was convicted of the possession of explosives and given a five-year sentence, and he still has unanswered questions about his knowledge of the murder of young Paul Quinn in south Armagh.”
House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We have had a gallery of serious terrorist convicts elected not just to the Northern Ireland Assembly, and not just to this House—they do not take their seats but get all the expenses that the rest of us get; some have gone on to hold governmental office in Northern Ireland. I think of some of the more notorious ones, such as the Old Bailey bomber, Gerry Kelly, who came to this city to bomb the Old Bailey. A man died and, in due course, Gerry Kelly was convicted and put where he ought to have been—in prison. He escaped, shooting a prison officer in the head in the course of his escape. He was then able to stand for and be elected to the Northern Ireland Assembly. More than that, he was able to become a junior Minister to the First Minister of Northern Ireland.”
House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Dr Allin-Khan. I commend the petitioners who brought forward the important issue we are debating. I certainly endorse both the spirit and the letter of the petition, but I want to make an important point. If the Government are ever to act on this matter, as they should, they must act on a UK-wide basis. I say that as someone who represents a constituency in Northern Ireland, where too often a double standard has been applied. We should not and must not have a double standard on the issue of terrorists being allowed to be elected in one part of the United Kingdom but not in another. I say that in the context of the sad experience of Northern Ireland.”
House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Minister talks about standards in voting and public life. As I indicated in my speech, weekend after weekend, we have people in public life glorifying terrorism and saluting the memories of their fallen colleagues, as they call them, who were vile, vicious terrorists. How is that upholding any standard in public life?”
House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Today the Department confirmed to me in a written answer that over the years 2018 and 2019, the Ministry of Defence paid almost £12,000 to Jeffrey Donaldson in respect of a peacekeeping consultancy for the Cameroons. How common is it that sitting Members of Parliament are paid consultancy fees, and who else has been paid?”
House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I really would like the Minister to address this question: what is the effect of the regulations on the sale of machinery made in Great Britain to another part of the United Kingdom? I would like a very clear answer on that because, in significant measure, it goes to the heart of the matter. Please, Minister, answer that question.”
House of Commons30 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Not satisfied with subjecting my part of the United Kingdom to a foreign jurisdiction making laws that we cannot change, they are now going to set the whole United Kingdom under identical laws made in a foreign place. I really do think it is time that we, as parliamentarians, woke up to what we are being asked to do. I have one practical question for the Minister. Under the regulations, Northern Ireland’s goods will have to bear the European CE marking and the UKNI marking, and then they will be able to be sold into Great Britain. What about machinery made in Great Britain? How can it be sold into Northern Ireland? It will not bear the CE marking. Will it bear the UKNI marking? Have we created a situation in which we are going to cut the pipeline of supply from GB to Northern Ireland?”
House of Commons30 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It really is ridiculous beyond belief. The fundamental constitutional and democratic point is that in this Committee this afternoon, parliamentarians are being invited to nod through laws that they did not make, did not write and cannot change to enforce the EU regulation that is coming in in January, and to enforce it in a part of this United Kingdom in respect of which this is supposed to be the sovereign Parliament. What an insult to all of us as parliamentarians to belong to a proclaimed sovereign Parliament to have to pass laws that we did not make and cannot change. That is the very essence of what is before us. The Government, as has already been referred to, have said it themselves. In order to produce their reset, they are going to bring in a statutory instrument to make the whole of the United Kingdom compliant with EU laws.”
House of Commons30 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The regulations are the latest example of the humiliation of this proclaimed sovereign United Kingdom Parliament in adopting laws that it did not make and laws it cannot change—laws that are made in a foreign jurisdiction. We have already seen that in multiple examples. We have had it in the vehicle type regulations, under which people cannot now buy a new car in Northern Ireland made to GB-type regulations and must buy one made to EU-type regulations at an extra expense of £4,000; we have had it with tumble dryers—there are certain types of tumble dryers that can no longer be bought in Northern Ireland; and now we are to have it in respect of machinery. Who would have thought that the EU single market was so fragile that the composition of a leaf blower coming into Northern Ireland placed it in jeopardy?”
House of Commons30 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade to make a statement on steel tariffs in relation to Northern Ireland.”
House of Commons30 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Many businesses in Northern Ireland depend very much on steel imports, yet here they are facing a new regime tomorrow and only hearing about it today.”
House of Commons30 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Secondly, will the EU’s new traceability rules, which it calls the “melt and pour” rules, be applied to steel being imported into Northern Ireland? If they are, they will impose an extra layer of bureaucracy, with form filling and certificates having to be obtained that are not required when steel is brought into Great Britain. Could we have clarity on that? Thirdly, last Thursday the Minister said that 74% of steel imports to Great Britain will not be covered by the UK trade measure. Can the same be said of Northern Ireland? Is it the same level of exemption—if we want to call it that—in respect of Northern Ireland, given the import of the EU governance? I ask those questions because in Northern Ireland we do not make steel; we rely exclusively on importing it.”
House of Commons30 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am grateful to the Minister for coming to the House. I have to say, there is an inherent absurdity, and indeed a constitutional offence, in having to come to the sovereign Parliament of the United Kingdom to ask whether there will be any tariff arrangements on moving steel from one part of the United Kingdom to another. Indeed, one recalls that last Thursday, the Minister said that he could not tell us because he had to await the EU decision, which underscores how absurd it is that these matters are governed by a foreign jurisdiction and not by ourselves. I have three specific questions for the Minister. First, is there any quota differential in regard to any class of steel, and if so, in respect of which classes?”
House of Commons30 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Surely the Minister must agree that sustaining and instilling confidence in victims is essential to securing and sustaining prosecutions, and therefore any indication that there could be early release of such a person is bound to undermine a victim’s confidence. Last week in Northern Ireland, through the bravery of two young women, we saw Jeffrey Donaldson convicted as a child rapist—a man who passed himself off in this House and elsewhere as a statesman, demonstrating that no one, thankfully, is above the law. But if we get into the business of early release for child rapists, how do we ever hope to sustain victims coming forward?”
House of Commons29 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Minister said that the business of this Government was to secure the borders of this nation. In that context, can I therefore ask him how many of the buses travelling through the open back door into the United Kingdom from the Irish Republic have ever been stopped and how many of those seeking asylum have had their credentials checked since this Government came to power two years ago? We all know what happened a few weeks ago in north Belfast, where an asylum seeker is now in custody for attempted murder, yet there has been no effort by this Government to close that back door. Why is that? Why are we allowing people to enter this United Kingdom unchecked? We talk about stopping the small boats. When are we going to stop the buses?”
House of Commons29 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I use this debate to draw attention to those facts and to say to this Government—more in hope than expectation—that one day they will realise that they are the Government of the United Kingdom, and that means promoting the United Kingdom, not promoting the partitioning of it. It means promoting the growth not of an all-Ireland economy, but of an all-UK economy. Sadly, this Government, deliberately and consciously, are failing in that fundamental mission.”
House of Commons29 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Intertrade UK is seeking to promote trade within an economy of 70 million people, and it gets £750,000 to do it. InterTradeIreland is supposed to be promoting trade on an all-Ireland basis for a population of 7 million, and it gets millions upon millions, 40 members of staff, and more. Where is the logic? Other than the logic of wanting to do down inter-UK trade, where is the logic of being so abundantly miserly with Intertrade UK in comparison to the funds being given to InterTradeIreland? When I read that the Government’s second priority in this area is this idea of “protecting the UK internal market”, I see it as a joke—not just a joke, but a very sick joke—because the very opposite has been done to my part of the United Kingdom.”
House of Commons29 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“When we look at the small print in these accounts, we see that the Government are going to give the mighty sum of £2.25 million over three years to a body called Intertrade UK, the purpose of which, as the name suggests, is to promote trade within the United Kingdom—and the Government are giving it £750,000 per annum to do so. Intertrade UK has no staff and no offices—nothing. Let me contrast that with InterTradeIreland: InterTradeIreland exists for the correlative purpose of promoting trade on an all-Ireland basis. It gets £5 million a year of British taxpayers’ money. It also gets southern Government money. It has over 40 staff, plush offices and a real programme of work. Contrast that with Intertrade UK—the Secretary of State thinks it is adequate to give that organisation no staff, no offices and £750,000 a year.”
House of Commons29 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Instead of protecting the UK internal market, this Government have wrecked it, because we now have an internal market that is partitioned by a full international customs border down the Irish sea, courtesy of the very lies I referred to earlier and the Windsor framework. Far from protecting the UK internal market, the Northern Ireland Office has gleefully presided over the sabotaging of the UK internal market. In a recent survey, the Federation of Small Businesses found that 38% of GB businesses that used to supply Northern Ireland have stopped supplying it. Why? Because of the unbearable paperwork and burdens that are put on businesses in order for them to trade with Northern Ireland. Far from protecting the UK internal market, we have a UK internal market that has been riven by this Government’s actions.”
House of Commons29 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If policing and justice had never been devolved, the Secretary of State would have had no escape route in terms of finding the money to give policing to the citizens of Northern Ireland. It was a moment of folly, just over 10 years ago, to devolve policing and justice. There is a real burden that I wanted to come to, and it is this. The Northern Ireland Office’s promotional website states that the Northern Ireland Office has three priorities, and within the second priority are the wonderful words, “protecting the UK internal market”. That, of course, is the one thing that this Government have lamentably failed to do.”
House of Commons29 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Maybe you have to raise some money yourself.” None of that has happened. The absence of that engendered a belief that yet again they can produce the begging bowl and have the overspends written off. I look forward to hearing from the Secretary of State how clear he is about whether or not that will yet happen again. Reference has also been made to policing. Yes, policing is grossly short of funding and it is a scandal that, in my constituency and others, if you can muster together three or four community constables you are doing well for a town and multiple villages. It is a scandal, but it does bring one back to the absolute folly of ever having devolved policing and justice. The Government’s attitude today is, “Policing and justice is devolved, so you find the money.” The allocations are wholly inadequate.”
House of Commons29 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“There was much that should have been done by the Northern Ireland Executive parties at the time of going back into devolution to extract the financial settlement that was needed. Now we have reached the situation where overspend is the norm in Northern Ireland. That overspend is built on an expectation that in due course there will be a bail-out. That has been the pattern throughout the years and that is the expectation of this Executive: in due course, there will be a bail-out or a writing-off of the moneys that have been overspent. It has happened before and that is the essence of the demand again. Are the Government going to do that once more? We have had occasions when past Governments have said to the Northern Ireland Executive, “If we’re going to bail you out, you have to transform and do all sorts of things to save money.”
House of Commons29 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗