Stormont Soundbites - Tetchy first ministers
Friday, April 24th, 2009TETCHY MARTIN
Tetchiness is becoming a hallmark of the Sinn Fein - DUP double act. Poor Martina Purdy took the brunt of Peter Robinson’s bile in the Great Hall, but Martin McGuinness is not always the easygoing grandpa he likes to project. He had a go at Dolores Kelly because of her criticism of inaction in the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister, but the Lady from Lurgan was well fit for him. The occasion was a discussion on the Barroso Report, which has been lying in his office for the last year:
Mrs D Kelly: I welcome today’s statement. I am sure that it is entirely coincidental that it was scheduled after the SDLP tabled a no-day-named motion to discuss the Barroso report.
The Executive’s response to the report has taken almost as long as the Barroso Commission took to report in the first instance. I am disappointed about the lengthy delays. …. The Chairperson of the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister asked how specific actions will be measured against outcomes contained in the Barroso report. How will we take that process forward?
The deputy First Minister: It is difficult to respond to that ramble. However, when some people ask questions, they are interested only in engaging in a point-scoring exercise. I prefer people to approach the matter from a genuine point of view as opposed —
Mrs D Kelly: I am.
The deputy First Minister: I do not accept that. We are involved in an important body of work, and Members will be aware that considerable work was undertaken in order to develop a response to President Barroso’s report.
Dolores had asked him: Why did the deputy First Minister’s response make no reference to Commissioner Hübner’s offer of a place at her Cabinet table for a Member of the Northern Ireland Assembly? Will the Executive accept that offer? If so, how and when?
Martin waffled around that one but Peter Weir - one of the UUP’s Baby Barristers before he jumped to the DUP - made one of his usual flat attempts at smartassery:
Mr Weir: I wonder whether the deputy First Minister will look again at the SDLP’s offer to reconsider the Hübner appointment. After all, it may be the only route by which Alban Maginness can get into Europe in the next few months - unless he enters the UEFA Cup next year.
Alban was soon on his feet:
Mr A Maginness: Despite Mr Weir’s Cassandra-like prediction, I assure the deputy First Minister that when I am elected on 8 June 2009, I will engage fully with the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister.
It is proper and necessary that MEPs do that, and it is also proper that the Assembly co-operates with the European Union in order to develop relationships. My party certainly supports and welcomes today’s statement, in so far as it goes. Although the statement is lacking in some detail, it is nonetheless a positive first step towards building that relationship.
The development of a relationship between ourselves and Europe is dependent on everybody’s working together. That means not only those in the Assembly, but those in the Executive. How do the First Minister and deputy First Minister propose that all Departments be involved in the fullest development of policy and co-operation in the European Union? I see that as the key element in moving forward.
EDUCATIONAL UNDERACHIEVEMENT
Next business was a motion from Alasdair McDonnell:
That this Assembly recognises the threat to future prosperity and well-being posed by educational underachievement in many communities; and calls on the Executive, and the Minister of Education in particular, to produce a cross-cutting departmental action programme designed to tackle educational underachievement.
Baroness May Blood tells a story about going into a school in the Shankill and asking the children what they wanted to be when they grew up. One lad put up his hand and said: “A Loyalist ex-prisoner”. That sort of situation formed the backdrop for Alasdair’s presentation.
Educational underachievement is one of the biggest challenges and threats to the political, social and economic stability of our society. Although the damage and the lasting effects of it may not be realised for 10 or 15 years, nevertheless, I believe - and many will agree with me - that it is a serious threat. Huge swathes of our children and young people are living in disadvantaged areas in predominantly, but not exclusively, loyalist working-class areas. They are being failed severely by our political system and with respect to educational achievement.
When many of those children are asked what they would like to be when they grow up, some as young as seven have told me that they want to be like former paramilitaries or drug dealers. That is because when they look around them they see that those who are living on the edges of crime have a lot of money and drive big cars. In other primary schools, principals have told me that children as young as seven are having suicidal thoughts. Furthermore, those principals are deeply concerned that an increasing amount of staff time is being taken up with social-welfare work, such as completing disability living allowance (DLA) forms for parents, rather than with teaching.
The DUP naturally used the occasion to get in the odd dig at Caitriona Ruane, but possibly the most perplexing outburst came from the UUP:
Mr B McCrea: The facts destroy all of the political rhetoric and ideology that comes from Sinn Féin. Sinn Féin has no notion about education because its members did not bother to understand the facts. They come out with some standard Marxist line about equality as if that is the answer to everything. Equality does not work in this context because, although all children are valued equally, they are not all equal. What we need is intervention, where people -
Sinn Fein’s Caral Ní Chuilin is said to have sworn an oath not to smile until Ireland is free, but she is an increasingly competent parliamentarian:
Ms Ní Chuilín: Will the Member give way?
Mr B McCrea: I will.
Ms Ní Chuilín: I will not take up much of the Member’s time. I simply want to remind him that the Ulster Unionist Party signed up to section 75 and to the equality implications of the Programme for Government. Is that party changing from that position, as part of its new journey into conservatism? [Laughter.]
The motion was passed without a vote.
SOCIAL HOUSING
Next up was a UUP motion on social housing:
That this Assembly notes, with concern, the Department for Social Development’s recent priority change which gives greater emphasis to the refurbishment of social housing, as opposed to redevelopment; further notes the huge detrimental effect this will have on the most vulnerable people in our society; and calls on the Minister to provide social homes fit for the twenty-first century throughout Northern Ireland.
Margaret Ritchie’s position on social housing has always been very simple: ‘Give me the money and I will build the houses’. Due to falling NIHE house sales and the difficulty of selling off land for good prices, money is very short and to protect social housing new-build, major refurbishment schemes have had to be curtailed. Thomas Burns laid it out:
Mr Burns: The motion seems to suggest that the Minister does not want to demolish old houses, redevelop rundown areas or build new homes and that she prefers to give a few houses a coat of paint. Nothing could be further from the truth. The motion also states that the Minister is getting her priorities wrong and has made bad choices. That is totally untrue. The motion, as it stands, misses the point. I make that very clear. The Department for Social Development does not have enough money to do what needs to be done. The Minister is doing her best to make savings within her budget, but the fact is that, for the most part, the DSD is a spending Department. More money must be found for the DSD budget. I do not mean that the Minister should wait for a few handouts from the monitoring rounds; I mean that there must be a review of the entire Budget and of the Programme for Government.
And Pat Ramsey rammed it home:
Mr Ramsey: There is, however, as many Members have said, a major hole in the Budget, caused by the collapse of the housing market. That means that people are not purchasing their Housing Executive properties as they did previously. As a result, Housing Executive revenue was down £80 million last year. That is a serious amount of money that the Minister could have spent on modernisation and refurbishment. Revenue will fall by a further £100 million in the next two years. Given those circumstances, which affect other Departments as well, one might have expected that there would have been a new Budget or, as was said by a Member on the DUP Benches, a “re-profiling” of the existing Budget and a re-profiling of the Programme for Government and a new investment strategy. The SDLP has been making those points for months.
The DUP’s Jim Shannon then rowed in. We bring you his contribution without further comment:
Mr Shannon: Las week A wus aa a plennin maetin aa Airds Cooncil where thair wur 38 options tae pit aff oan the schedule - monie o’ thaim wur plens fer hoosin schemes at wur provisionally mairked fer social hoosin - hits gyely important at the Meenester’s Depairtment waarks wi’ the Plennin Service fer tae mak siccar at social developments ir gien aa needfu’ hefts tae mak’ siccar at the plens ir wi’ in what bes acceptable tae the Plennin Service an’ at they ir passed.
Strategically, Sinn Fein’s aim has always been to restrict and damage the sole SDLP minister, but they have chosen a particularly blunt instrument for this purpose; Fra McCann, social development spokesperson. Fra has failed to land a single significant blow on Margaret, and she beats off his attacks so deftly and completely that one almost has sympathy for him (almost). But on this occasion she put Fred Cobain back in his box:
Minister for Social Development (Ms Ritchie): The motion refers to a “recent priority change” in my Department that favours refurbishment over redevelopment. I must admit that I was not aware of that change, and I thank the Members for bringing that phenomenon to my attention. It is, of course, a nonsense. There has been no priority change or policy shift. From my first day in office, my priority has been to address housing need wherever that need exists. I have already brought forward change that will deliver the most modern social housing ever seen here, and I have re-prioritised my budget to ensure that we provide housing solutions that support those in greatest housing need.



