11/12/2012 Stormont Today

Welcome to Stormont today. The issue dominating proceedings was

violence associated with the ongoing flag protests. The house

came together to condemn the attempted murder of a police woman

last night. It was on act of murderous intent. And that Act,

like those road blocks, like that violence, are the consequence of

the failure of the politics of this house. Doubts were raised about the

planning minister's enthusiasm for the Narrow Water a bridge. Alex

Attwood got his chance. I would suggest that those who continue to

use the language of a smell are digging a series of holes. Bringing

us the benefit of his analysis, I'm joined by journalist Steven

Today's proceedings began in much the same way as yesterday's, with

condemnation of overnight violence linked to the ongoing flag protests.

Members on all sides of the House rose to speak out on an attack

against a patrol car close to the office of the Alliance MP Naomi

long. A female officer was in the car when protesters threw a petrol

bomb inside. We are no longer local -- talking about the issue of how

many days they union flag is flown on Belfast City Hall. We're not

talking about the contest between democracy and the rule of law on

the one hand, and terrorism and fascism on the other hand. And they

can be no IFS or buts, no qualifications in that debate.

There must be an utterly united voice against that. And they do say

to certain members of this House, if they condemn violence then they

must say that they condemn violence without the buts statements. Can I

make it clear that nobody should use an attack on a police officer

to score political points, and I will not do that. I want to make it

clear that the attempted murder of the police officer yesterday

evening was a despicable attack upon the rule of law, and something

that this whole house should rightly United Pon and condemn

utterly. Yesterday this party condemned without reservation,

without qualification, without a Vegas that any violence associated

with the decision of Belfast City Council is wrong and should stop.

condemn all of the attacks that have taken place throughout the

week. I would also like to welcome the statement by the leader of the

UUP this morning, when he pointed out that since these protests don't

seem to be able to be had in a peaceful way, that it would stand

to bring it to a conclusion. I agree with the First Minister that

there has to be a right to peaceful protest but I think we have gone

beyond that this particular week. I would argue for calm over Christmas,

for people to pull back and allow for conversations, not just about

flags but about the whole issue of equality and an assured future.

would bring a petrol bomb to a peaceful protest? I have many times

spoken on the use of petrol bombs. It is not something you just pick

up on a side street. And the people that did this went with murderous

intent. They are not loyalist. To be a loyalist you are loyal to the

ground. These people are not loyal to the Crown. They are not loyal to

the flag. They are not loyal to the Union flag. They are nothing other

than terrorists. It was an act of murderous intent. And that act,

like those road blocks, like that of violence, are the consequence of

the failure of the politics of this House. A failure of the politics of

this House and of this city. And it is about time people faced up to

their failures. Because if they do not, and they failed to step back

from the brink, they are talking themselves into, they will be

coming here to condemn other terrible act. This must be brought

to an end. And it is not enough to come in here in the morning and

condemn and go on the airwaves and continued to profile out colleagues,

Fellow elected representatives and to signal them out as being the

problem when in fact they are not. They are the architects of the new

Northern Ireland. Mr McGuinness, would it be of assistance to this

House if I or some other member of the SDLP lodged a Minette of the

Newry and warned District Council in relation to the matter Mr

Kennedy raised, so that this house can judge for itself whoever took

in that decision making? Order. Order. Let us move on. We are

coming to a point where there is not a point of order. Members are

getting up under disguise of point of order and trying to make

political statements. The Minister of Justice which has to make a

statement to the house this morning. With permission, I wish to make a

statement regarding a meeting under the auspices of the inter-

governmental agreement on co- operation of criminal justice

matters held in Dublin, 23rd November. Order. Order. Order.

Order. This house is in session. The Speaker battling to keep the

house in order. There were further developments on the flag issue

later in the day. The planned meeting of the Assembly commission

didn't happen because it was boycotted by Sinn Fein, STRB and

Alliance. I was horrified. If ever there was a display of political

insanity, that was it. Here we are with a situation where we are

trying to convince people to be calm, to allow politics to take

over, to sit back and make sure that the democratic process works.

They all know and a waiting to hear what happens when the Assembly

commission, is there a political way forward? And parties decide to

boycott the meeting of the Assembly commission. I think that is wrong.

A group of senior Unionist representatives met at parliament

buildings during the night to discuss all of that. Steven

McCaffrey is political correspondent of The Detail website.

Let's talk about this joint statement that was issued this

afternoon. How significant is it, in your view? It shows that

whatever the efforts to try and calm down the flag crisis on the

streets, it is certainly a major political issue. Today the

commission didn't happen. This statement has been put together by

the Unionist parties. They make their anger clear at the fact the

meeting didn't go ahead. They describe it as deplorable. This

group is made up of the DUP, the UUP and also Jim Allister, the UKIP

representative and the Independent. They've all round it on the other

parties that didn't take part in the meeting that was planned to

discuss the flag. They are demanding a further meeting happen

on 14th December. It is a stepping up of the political pressure on

this issue. This is Wednesday, and they are insisting a meeting will

take place by Friday at the latest. I don't know if they can make that

happen if the others don't turnout. Do you know quite what the

choreography or developments might be in the next 48 hours?

argument today was it wasn't possible to reach a quorum, so the

Commission said they couldn't meet. Just because those other parties

didn't turn up? Correct. I know that privately some of the Unionist

parties, members are being paid for members of the commission. There is

also the issue that if people want to say -- say democracy is working,

then the Unionist parties will say it will be increasingly difficult

for this commission to meet. On the face of it it appears this attempt

to possibly keep the issue in play and perhaps keep the political

tension in play, but given that the statement asks for a review process,

this could also be read as an attempt to begin what would be a

very lengthy and potentially drawn- out process to see what, if

anything, happens with the flag. The statement goes on to condemn

the ongoing violence very clearly. But it says, any protest that takes

place must be peaceful. The First Minister a couple of days ago said

he wanted protests to be suspended. That is not in a statement.

certainly does seem to be a little disjointed. There is also the

impression that the other parties have ruled behind the DUP on this.

Although Mike Nesbitt spoke of the issue tonight, they're very much

was a feeling this evening it was Peter Robinson who was speaking on

behalf of the people who met to discuss this issue. I think there

is an element of confusion about where this is going, but this is a

symptom of the fact this is a very confused, tense and difficult

situation all round. Last Tuesday there was a clash of ministers and

the Chamber. Sammy Wilson questioned the speed with which

Alex Attwood granted planning permission to the Narrow Water a

bridge project. Mr Wilson said the decision had the smell of politics

about it. Today, Mr Attwood got his chance to have his say. In a

contribution to that Tuesday debate on Narrow Water, be replying

Minister stated, this was an article 31 planning application, so

it was decided and signed off at the planning ministry. He may want

to correct me on this, but we have never had an article 31 planning

application with all the sensitivities that are involved in

this one dealt with so quickly. Unquote, let me repeat, we have

never had an article 31 application dealt with so quickly. So what did

I do? I request a review of planning files to identify article

31 applications signed off by the Planning Minister and dealt with

quickly. The list is extensive. Ikea Hollywood exchange, and

industrial development, a shopping development in Glengormley. A high

school in County Down. That decision was taken in five months.

And a business park Instagram. There is a smell around this one.

He may try to deny that but it seems very strange that we have an

application lodged on 9th February and the minister has an older man

dusted within a couple of months. Is the minister now telling us

today that from this day forth, all article 31s will be dealt with as

swiftly and quickly as he has dealt with this one? If he does that then

I think he will go some distance to allay the concerns of members of

this house. I find it a matter of regret that the irregular and false

words, in my view, used previously, and I want to tread cautiously here

so correct me if you think I'm going too far because sometimes

they can go too far. I think it is inappropriate and doesn't reflect

the content of my statement, to repeat an assertion that in my view

has been comprehensively, robustly and firmly rebutted in the content

of my statement, in respect of this planning application. Let me repeat.

There is no political smell. This process was absolutely proper. The

pardon was proper. The process from February to the decision later in

the autumn was absolutely proper. Any contention otherwise is

unhelpful and inaccurate, in my view. I would suggest that those

who continue to use the language of a smell are actually digging a

series of holes, looking for the deepest one and jumping into it.

Alex Attwood. Arlene Foster has been defending Northern Ireland as

a tourist destination, despite recent disappointing visitor

figures. The minister has been keen to point out they are provisional

and incomplete, but it didn't stop her fellow MLA calling for a change

of tack. Obviously the minister will share everybody's

disappointment that figures are down. Whilst the minister might try

to blame Tourism Ireland, there are a number of factors. Would the

Minister agree with me that promoting the island of Ireland as

a single tourism destination where visitors can go to the giant's

Causeway, be Fermanagh Lakeland and the clips in one single trip in

trying to promote two different markets? In answer to his question,

he needs to look at the markets he is looking at. The TV market, we

had a piece of work carried out not just by the Northern Ireland

Tourist Board but bike Culture Ireland and the number of industry

providers as well, they did a piece of work specifically into the

market. What they are essentially saying is what we've been doing is

not producing the results we need to produce. There needs to be a

Northern Ireland specific campaign in Great Britain. That is the word

not of May but of the Tourism Task Force. If the member wants to look

at objectives, that is the objective reporter should look at.

I'm pleased that the tourism recovery task force has now plotted

out a way forward which has been taken forward by Tourism Ireland

and by the Northern Ireland Tourist Board. We will look forward to

I thank the Minister for her answer so far and don't disagree with

anything she says. But given that Ireland and Britain here the -- saw

the wins of the past in a very public way last year, does the

Minister not agree that we should maximise every opportunity to

ensure that visitors coming from Britain visit Northern Ireland as

well? That is precisely what we will be doing with our campaign,

which looks at the UK City of Culture. It is UK City of Culture.

We are inviting the rest of the UK to come to Northern Ireland to

celebrate the very first UK City of Culture. We're having the world

Police and Fire Games here for the very first time. That will be a

tremendous celebration. The G8 Summit is coming to County

Fermanagh, because we are part of the United Kingdom. Because we are

part of the UK we are able to host the summit.

Any wild salmon caught during recreational angling will soon have

to be returned to the water unharmed under plans announced

today. Caral Ni Chuilin, responsible for angling, announced

new measures over the fear of dwindling numbers of North Atlantic

salmon. My statement in March this year set

out grounds for concern. International census have concern

that Atlantic salmon are dying at sea in significant numbers. Some in

North America and Britain are threatened with extinction.

Bushmills salmon station its shows a decline in return of around 30%

in 1997 to 5% today. The key messages that emerged was that 83%

of respondents supported a total cessation of commercial salmon

fishing and 74% supported the introduction of mandatory catch and

release for recreational angling. I believe that the measures I am

announcing today are appropriate and essential to conserve and

protect wild salmon stocks in the future. I would like to consider

the commercial fishing of wild salmon. In doing so, I recognise

that the continuation of commercial fishing for salmon is a complex and

contentious issue. Fishermen have harvested salmon for hundreds of

fears off the North Antrim and county down coasts. -- hundreds of

years. They recognise steps must be taken to ensure the long-term

survival of the species. They have shown this commitment by not

fishing in 2012. There is a need to achieve a balance between

conservation and fishing but they allowed for the sustainable

harvesting of salmon in the future, should stock levels permit this. --

that may laugh. I will therefore introduce legislation to impose

mandatory cessation of commercial wild salmon fisheries to take

effect in the 2014 season. This would remain in place until such

times as scientific evidence confirms that a sustainable surplus

of fish is over conservation limits for a number of years. I wish to

consider recreational fishing of wild salmon. That is against the

public interest. I'm pleased to say many recreational anglers

understand this and have, in general, supported my call for a

voluntary catch and release during 2012. It is essential catch and

release before Broad caught salmon continues. It maintains social and

economic benefits while ensuring the continuation of salmon. I am

introducing legislation to impose mandatory catch and release across

the jurisdiction, with effect from the 2014 season. I will also

legislate the sale off this from Paddy 14.

Planning permission from houses in rural areas is on the rise. Alex

Attwood work and the increase, which she said reflects the

importance of strong rural communities. -- which he said.

What we have been trying to do is make it easier for forming rural

drivers and non-performing will all do well this -- farming and none

for mink and rural dwellers to build homes in the countryside. I

would like to confirm that with one figure. Compared with a similar

quarter last year, approvals for new single dwellings in the

countryside are up from 83.9-EDF 0.5, and replacement dwellings in -

- are up to 92%. Does the Minister accept there is a perception to

rural attitudes between the east and west of Northern Ireland, and

the role of land used generally? Bat is a fair question. It would

have been more accurate 18 months ago. When I looked at the profile

of decisions and recommendations for approval and refusal, there had

seemed to me to be a disparity. When I spoke to MLAs across parties

in this chamber, there seemed to be deferential treatment of

applications in some areas, especially the west compared to the

east and daring, with in some particular areas of the West. That

is why, because of the evidence that was coming forward to me from

planning officials and representatives, I thought that

there was a point consistent with the sentiment of that question.

When you look at the application of policy here and now compared with

then, that perception is less acute. I would not be continuing the

review unless I thought there was further interpretation required in

order to ensure consistency and in order to ensure the proper

flexibility of the policy. I thank the Minister for his answers so far

and his acknowledgement of the right of the rural people to have a

home in a place where they were born. Is the Minister cover cent of

the problem that might have arisen where it is commonly known that the

rural countryside is becoming like Donegal? I had reason to write to a

former Secretary of State of this place, criticising him win in the

House of Lords he said about six months ago, when it came to English

rural countryside policy, you didn't want to have what happened

in Northern Ireland, as he saw it, over there. The reason why I wrote

to Lord King, formerly Secretary of State of this place, was to point

out to him that he should know better.

The agency to half with attracting jobs to Northern Ireland has come

under scrutiny following news of a new pay deal for its Chief

Executive. Their representative of Invest NI appeared before the

Enterprise Committee last week, as we come here in our weekly look at

committee business. Has a bonus been paid for the last

three years? A performance element, I would commit. Will the salary be

backdated? That payment has now been made. Once the renegotiated

package was approved by the minister, the minister for finance.

The postal there is being paid what his previous contract entitled him

to get. Is the post holder down money? He is paid what was due

based on the rich eat -- renegotiated package. Just to be

perfectly clear, if the performance element had been paid, it would be

an additional over 20,000 above what he actually would have been

paid for one year. �20,000 a year? About �7,000 a year for three years.

The request for hard facts is helpful and important. We would

want to be helpful to the committee. I am sure the committee will

appreciate this would not be a proper forum to discuss, for

example, the performance of the Chief Executive or anything. I

would want to try and lay that as a barometer at the start. As far as a

hard facts are concerned, the Chief Executive applied for a post which

was advertised on the basis that there would be a salary of �160,000

per year with a performance-related element of the total remuneration

package equivalent to 30% of that. It became clear with the passage of

time that performance related pay was discredited, as a concept if

you like, and that presented a difficulty for Invest NI because

the Chief Executive had applied for a job, been successful, and then

agreed a contract based on that remuneration package. Given those

difficulties, Invest NI sought approval to renegotiate the package

with the department. That approval was granted. A new package was

renegotiated with the Chief Executive, all normal due process

was followed, and does remunerations have been put in

place. You said nothing had been paid in relation to performance-

related salary over the last few years. My conclusion I am drawing

from that, but Chief Executive's position was paid �160,000? 160,000

up until the last three years, and then the back dated element, there

is no agreed position at this point in time, so once that was agreed

and had ministerial approval which was six weeks ago, that was then

paid to the Chief Executive. point being, what he had been paid

over this last wire, he said nothing had been paid in relation

to performance management? Correct. That clears that up for me, thank

you. Let's talk about the census. The

figures were published today. How do some of the revelations square

with what has been happening on the ground? They headline from the

census was that the Protestant population has fallen to 48%, so

for the first time, the fact but it has dropped below 50 is quite

significant. -- that it has dropped. It probably would have been a big

story were it not for all issues today. It caused me to reflect on

Peter Robinson's speech at his party conference a couple of weeks

ago. We will remember in that speech, he made an appeal to his

party faithful and said, there is a portion of the Kaka lit -- Catholic

community that if Unionists could strike a deal that would secure the

union for a lengthy period into the future. Figures suggest he might

have been on to something with that. For the first time we see hard data

that 21% describe themselves as Northern Irish. Since the figures

today, we have had scenes on the streets of protests and violence,

and that can't have failed but to have a negative impact on those

very same Catholic quarters he might have wanted to appeal to.

it seems no time since he was making that speech thing there is a

difference on the part of some of those individuals in identifying as

Northern Irish, but not necessarily British? If we do what I think

Peter Robinson is doing, and cast our minds forward into the next

decade and what might happen, another intriguing question to ask

his, his argument was framed around the notion that people would be

presented with a question as to whether they would like the border

to disappear tomorrow, but if we look at the Scottish experience,

would be question be more important, given the figures we have seen