Statement by TUV leader Jim Allister:-
“The plight of our fishermen is undeniable. Yet, Minister O’Neill continues to sit on her hands. Once more she is trying to hide behind EU rules. Bad as the EU undoubtedly is, it does allow de minimus payments of up to €7,500 per recipient to relieve hardship. Why is the minister not availing of this option?
“Thus she can help, but, so far, has refused to do so. She must now step up to the mark and assist.”
Statement by Jim Allister MLA:
“On Tuesday evening I attended one of the Health and Social Care Board’s consultation sessions along with my TUV colleagues and representatives from Unions, care home staff and relatives of residents.
“The proposed criteria put forward by the HSC Board was quite simply a farce – it was entirely contrived to give only one sadly predictable outcome, that residential care homes would have to be closed.
“The criteria are predicated on the assumption that private facilities are better, and we all know that statutory residential homes such as Pinewood, The Roddens and Rosedale, to name but a few, are superb facilities.
“The criteria also set out that residential care homes will be judged on their admissions, but there has and continues to be a ban on new admissions! How absurd and insulting is it that this can be given any weight in the criteria. Of course there will be a trend for private care homes if no new admissions are granted to statutory homes.
“Ever since this process became public last April TUV have set out a fair way to move forward: end the ban on permanent admissions and give the residential care homes a level playing field to compete with the private sector. Only then will a comparison of services, cost, admissions etc be valuable.
“Those present also heard the ‘bombshell’ from an HSC Board representative who expressly said that it was the Minister who directed that the ban on admissions continue during the consultation period. I have written to John Compton, Chief Executive of the Health and Social Care Board, to ascertain the accuracy of this disclosure.
“Minister Poots can blame the Trusts all he wants, but the buck stops with him.”
Statement by Jim Allister MLA
“It is disappointing to learn that £5.7m of public money was not subject to proper procurement control and has been labelled as ‘potential malpractice’.
“It is indicative of the general disregard towards public money that this was not identified through internal checks and balances, but it took a whistleblower to expose the extent of the problem. Health Service Management have a lot to answer for, and lot to do before public confidence can be gained.
“It is simply unacceptable and lessons need to be learned.
“While it is a sad state of affairs it does highlight how vital whistleblowers can be in exposing malpractice and why everything should be done in order to protect those coming forward with such information and to encourage others to do likewise.”
Statement by TUV leader Jim Allister:-
“The spectacle of McGuinness, the epitome of inextricable links between terror and politics, demonising the Orange Order by his scurrilous attempt to link it and equate it to the UVF, takes some beating.
“However, the fact he tries to validate his claim by asserting it is based on what “leaders of the mainstream unionist parties” told him raises serious issues for them to deal with. If it is not true – and I am not suggesting for one moment that it is – then they need to take on McGuinness for this malicious falsehood. The leaders of “mainstream unionism” are readily identifiable, so, writs against McGuinness should issue. Malicious falsehood is an available tort on which he should now be pursued by Peter Robinson and Mike Nesbitt.
“Moreover, this episode underscores the utter failure of the present regime. When it has come to the point that the joint first ministers are so vilifying each other, then it is time the plug was pulled on the Stormont shambles. Government is not working and will not work, because mandatory coalition is of itself unworkable; rather, power is merely being abused by Sinn Fein to advance their divisive agenda from the top and heart of government. Haass is but the latest vehicle to feed their insatiable demands for concessions. The fact that Peter Robinson helped McGuinness initiate it is itself an indication of flawed judgement.
“Haass is not acceptable now, nor by 17th March, nor after the elections on 22nd May, when some might think they could revert to concession-giving form.”
An extract from Jim Allister MLA’s contribution to yesterday’s Haass debate:
Mr Allister: I am in this House unashamedly and unapologetically as a unionist. Therefore, when I read the seventh document from Haass, I make no apology for asking this question: what is in this document for unionism? Sadly, I find nothing, effectively, for unionism.
I consider the issue of the national flag. The document does nothing to restore the Union flag to its rightful place on Belfast City Hall. It does nothing to give it more prominent display on this Building. On flags, it delivers nothing for unionism.
On the past, this is a document that fails to even grapple with one of the most obscene, objectionable matters that touches upon the past: the definition of a victim. It does not at all address the issue of the equivalence that exists between the victim-maker and the victim. In that, it is a gross betrayal of innocent victims. I think that anyone supportive of innocent victims should have, within that process, made that the beginning and the end of the test of whether or not there was anything attainable. That has been a scourge in this society that has been used by the victim-makers to validate themselves and provide equivalence with those they made victims.
I come to the document and look to how it will deal with terrorism. I am still waiting for Mr Lyttle to put me right, but I find that it has nothing to say about the fact that, for 30 years and more, this Province was subjected to an unwarranted, vile campaign of terrorism. Instead, it sanitises it down to “the conflict”. It talks about actors. Mr Speaker, it was no actor who firebombed the La Mon hotel; it was no actor who took 10 innocent workmen out of a van at Kingsmills and slaughtered them in cold blood; it was no actor who planted the bomb in Enniskillen; it was no actor who went into a public house in Greysteel. They were terrorists, one and all. Anyone who fails to address that fundamental foundational issue in dealing with the past is making no serious effort to deal with it. On that, these proposals hopelessly flounder.
You then move, within that, to discover that innocent victims are meant to be exhilarated and encouraged by the fact that they might get some sanitised, self-serving version of Provo or Ulster Freedom Fighter (UFF) truth about why their innocent relatives died. It can even be anonymous. It is certainly untestable. That is itself an insult to innocent victims, who suffered so much at the hands of terrorists.
Mr Lyttle: Will the Member give way?
Mr Allister: Yes.
Mr Lyttle: Does the Member acknowledge that there are innocent victims in Northern Ireland who have lobbied for, asked for and requested the very process that he has just so fundamentally objected to?
Mr Allister: If there are innocent victims who want to be satisfied with a self-serving, Provo version of the truth that they cannot test, that will raise more questions than it will answer and that might even come from an anonymous source, it is a matter for those victims, but, I must say that I do not know too many of them. The innocent victims whom I know crave justice, and justice is someone being held accountable for the villainy that was visited on them and their family, not hearing some self-serving story that is part of the rewrite of history by perpetrators of terrorism. That is the vehicle that the Haass proposals offer, in the diminution of, of course, and as an alternative to, the proper pursuit of justice.
On parading, the proposals open up a whole new vista, where anyone, anywhere can object to any parade anywhere and then require the parade organisers to subject themselves to negotiation with that individual. We are meant to think that that is progress? Like everything else that seems to be in the proposals, that is not progress and not an advance.
Mr Allister: What the proposals represent, and this is why it is so enthusiastic for them, is another opportunity to pocket what Sinn Féin sees as some advance until the concession meter next needs to be fed, and then it will be out demanding more.
Commenting on the announcement that Peter Osborne has been appointed as Chair of the Community Relations Council, Jim Allister MLA said:
“I am surprised that the department over which the First Minister jointly presides has given its assent to Mr Osborne being appointed Chair of the Community Relations Council as this is the same Mr Osborne who has so alienated large swathes of the unionist community through his previous actions while Chairman of the Parades Commission.
“The question will be asked that after the mess created by the political decisions of the Parades Commission under Mr Osborne’s reign why is he being rewarded? The amount of quangos that we have to suffer, the significant public money wasted on them and the musical chairs of each constituted one should be alarming.
“I look forward to hearing the First Minister’s explanation of this decision.”
Note to Editors:
Jim Allister MLA has submitted the following Assembly Written Question:
To ask OFMDFM a) how many applicants were there for the position of Chair of the Community Relations Council; b) how many were interviewed; c) who comprised the interview panel; and d) was there ministerial sign off of the appointment.
Statement by TUV Leader Jim Allister MLA:
“I am dismayed that for the vile crime of aiding and abetting terrorism, linked to the callous murder of Sappers Mark Quinsey and Patrick Azimkar, that Marian McGlinchey has received a paltry suspended sentence.
“The Quinsey and Azimkar families, like many other families who have suffered such a loss, deserve justice. It is a sad reflection on our society when victims of terrorism cannot be assured that such justice as is obtained will result in meaningful punishment.”
Commenting on an “informed warning” for Gerry Kelly over his obstruction of the police when he jumped on the bonnet of a landrover, TUV leader Jim Allister said:
“This is political policing in action. While flag protesters are pursued by a special Public Order Enquiry Team and subjected to charges under the Serious Crime Act, the authorities pander to Bonnet Kelly with a meaningless “informed warning”, something which amounts to nothing.
“This will do nothing to restore loyalist faith in policing, but, rather, it will perpetuate the present disconnect.”
TUV’s analysis of the Haass proposals
General observations:
1. Throughout the document there is not a single acknowledgement that for 30 years we faced a campaign of vicious terrorism; instead “terrorism” is sanitised down to “the conflict”, inferring the mutual responsibility of the terroriser and the terrorised. The IRA escapes even a single mention. The only time “terrorist” is mentioned is in the same breath as “freedom fighter” (p22). There is no acceptance that terrorism was wrong and never justified. Continue Reading…
Message from Jim Allister MLA:
TUV had an effective year in 2013: we helped force the DUP’s huge u-turn on the odious Maze project, we piloted Ann’s Law through Stormont – giving innocent victims their first victory in years and Sinn Fein their first defeat – and, I believe, TUV’s very existence acted as a brake in the recent Haass talks.
From these successes we now look forward to 2014, with its challenges and opportunities. 22nd May will be a particular day of opportunity, when at the polls unionists and democrats will have the chance to strengthen our hand. If TUV has achieved with just one MLA and a handful of councillors, think what we could do with multiple representation across the province! Continue Reading…
