Posts Tagged 'Peter Robinson'

Fitness for Purpose and NI Water

Published December 31, 2010 Uncategorized 2 Comments
Tags: , , ,
Image of a manhole cover blown off by a June 2...

Image via Wikipedia

Peter Robinson questioned, yesterday, whether Northern Ireland Water – a government company owned and financed by the Executive – was fit for purpose. It’s clear that he is manoeuvring himself a good distance away from the body that is taking the bulk of the political flak from Northern Ireland’s own Waterleakgate scandal.

The ‘fitness for purpose’ phrase was used by another DUP politician, Lord Morrow, in a debate about Northern Ireland Water in the Assembly in September. However, Lord Morrow did not highlight under-investment as the reason why NIW, or the service it provided, was under-performing. Lord Morrow was referring to governmental and organisational matters when he asked Conor Murphy, the Minister with ultimate responsibility for water, how he might reorganise and reform NI Water.

And, when Conor Murphy answered, he made clear that he, too, had no issues relating to the levels of investment – or, indeed, the commitment of NIW staff:

“NI Water has been doing a good job on the delivery of water and sewerage infrastructure. It certainly received a substantial amount of public money, but the water and sewerage infrastructure has improved substantially, after decades of underinvestment, and a great credit is due to people in NIW for that.”

The Minister, back in March – shortly after agreeing NI Water’s 3 Year Plan – was at pains to point out that “no-one can deny that the water and sewerage infrastructure has improved radically.”

Indeed, I have read most of the debates in the Assembly relating to NI Water during the course of 2010 and can find no instances of MLAs – or indeed the Minister – arguing for much greater levels of investment in NI Water. The Minister has been making a number of political points relating to renationalising NI Water (at an apparent cost of £50m or so) – but there has been no clamour on the part of any of the political parties to substantially increase investment in Northern Ireland’s water infrastructure.

Even after the announcement of the Comprehensive Spending Review – that made clear that Northern Ireland’s capital budgets would be substantially reduced – there were no calls on the part of local politicians to raise funds to substantially increase infrastructure spending on water infrastructure. Instead, the Executive decided to defer water charges (the most likely source of additional capital funding) for four years.

NI Water spokespeople have made the point over the last few days that investment in Northern Ireland water network infrastructure is well behind the rest of the UK and that comparative network investment levels are around 50% less than in Scotland. And yet no MLAs have drawn attention to this continued under-investment (including the Minister responsible for NI Water).

Yesterday there were calls for ‘heads to roll’. Indeed, NI Water may be inefficient and badly run (frankly, I don’t know). However, the buck should stop at the Minister.

The Executive, and an unquestioning Assembly, are more responsible for under-investment in Northern Ireland’s water infrastructure than the body required to deliver such investment.

Related Articles

Robbo and Secularism: I think not

Published November 28, 2010 Opinion 12 Comments
Tags: , , , , , ,
Peter Robinson Visits Riverdale Primary School

Robinson with Young Earth Creationist Edwin Poots (Pic: DUP Flickr)

Peter Robinson was at pains to give the impression, when interviewed by Jim Fitzpatrick on the Politics Show today, that the DUP was going secular – appealing to all, apparently. He talked about the post-conflict Realpolitik that was all about issues that mattered to people, rather than the constitutional issue.

Now, what has motivated this new-found secularist political outlook could be debated. Perhaps he realized, after losing his East Belfast parliamentary seat, that old Unionism wasn’t cutting it any more. Moreover, Robinson’s personality is such that party-political reasons were sought to explain his Westminster demise, rather than any failings in his own personality. Apart from DUP apparatchiks, most people find him prickly, a tad sleazy, and vastly aloof and enervated from real world issues (having occupied a political cocoon for decades).

My particular issue with the man is his hypocrisy. He talks about the DUP’s desire to appeal to “Nationalists” and yet DUP rhetoric is the stuff of the social right and, often, the fiscal left. But an even more fundamental stopping block to secular progress is the bizarre, reactionary and anti-modernist views of his front bench team.

For example, how can Robinson seriously suggest that his Party could appeal to the modern minded when it has, within its midst, people of the ilk of the Reverend William McCrea, Nelson McCausland and Edwin Poots? After all, these intellectually depraved acolytes  help define the Party’s policy positions.

The “Reverend” William McCrea gave a graveside oration, in 1975, for two of the men responsible for the Miami Showband murders.   He has also shared platforms with Loyalist thugs and was convicted for riotous assembly in 1971. And yet Robinson, at this weekend’s DUP conference, made a particular point of highlighting his fondness and affection for McCrea – a man that many of us consider the most obvious manifestation of the DUP’s political psychosis.

Nelson McCausland, in his capacity as Culture and Arts Minister, made clear earlier in the year, that he felt the Ulster Museum should have exhibits that reflect the “views of the people of Northern Ireland” rather than support an understanding of science. He also believes that the Protestant people of Ulster descended from one of the lost tribes of Israel. (Very lost, I’d suggest, if it ended-up here).

Edwin Poots is a young-earth creationist (this means he believes God made the earth, and all the organisms therein, a few thousand years ago). He also opposes Darwinian evolutionary theory.

And yet, despite the rag-bag collection of looners in his political midst, Peter Robinson feels that his is the Party for Northern Ireland – representing an opportunity for a new secular dawn.

I think not.

Sheer Infuriating Hypocrisy

Published October 18, 2010 Opinion 13 Comments
Tags: , , , , , ,

 

Peter Robinson at the Evolve Public Policy Forum

Image by DUP Photos via Flickr

 

It has taken me a full day to temper the invective I was planning to use in response to Peter Robinson’s contribution to the education debate. To those of you who wanted me to welcome the DUP leader’s new-found fondness for secular education – you’re about to be disappointed.

This man has been involved in one of the most divisive forces in Northern Ireland politics. The DUP has systematically propped-up the malevolent cultural apartheid that corrupts every corner of our civil society. But now he wants a single state education system. This man runs a political party and front bench team that wants creationist garbage taught in our schools and “intelligent design theory” featured in our museums. His party’s flat-earth perspectives and reactionary dogma is the utter antithesis of all that is right-minded and free-thinking. He fronts a rag-bag collection of bigots and political fossils that have helped put Northern Ireland on the international laughing stock map of small-minded mini nations.

His motivation for having a single state-funded education system, with funding removed for state schools, runs counter to logic and decency. Don’t get me wrong. I’m no advocate of Irish medium schools – I don’t believe that state funding should have been extended to such schools. They are patently absurd. However many schools that he describes as church schools attain some of the highest standards of academic excellence not just in Northern Ireland – but also in the United Kingdom.  To remove state funding from some of our finest schools would be a public scandal.

Few, if any, of our finest church schools are “faith schools” in a pejorative sense. None is permitted to discriminate on the grounds of religious faith when employing staff. All adhere to state recommended curricula. Most teach children good standards of citizenship and mutual respect.

As an Atheist I choose to send one of my my children to a Quaker school – a school that makes clear that it accepts children of parents of faith and those (like me and my wife) who have no faith. It also happens to be a school that attains incredibly high academic standards. It certainly does not force religious doctrine or liturgy on its pupils. In all respects it adheres to the academic guidelines defined by the Accord Coalition.

Indeed, while Northern Ireland’s decency and civil society have been undermined by politicians, clergy and the two-tribe mentality of the state, our teachers have been beacons of tolerance. Our much maligned education system has managed to produce wonderful, well rounded and decent children against all the odds. And our so-called “integrated system” has been at the vanguard, often, of the two-tribe mentality when some of our best schools have focused, instead, on producing some of the best academic standards in Western Europe.  State-funded grammar schools help produce the highest scores in GCSE and A Level results in the United Kingdom.

For readers that aren’t familiar with the aims of the coalition, here they are. And, for the benefit of Peter Robinson, I suggest that he encourages all state-funded schools to embrace these aims. Then we will, indeed, have one system of education.

Declaration of Aims of the Accord Coalition:

In a pluralist, multi-cultural society, the state should promote tolerance and recognition of different values and beliefs. Given the dangers of segregation and the importance of community cohesion we need schools that welcome all and are committed to non-discrimination. Schools should promote a culture of questioning, of knowledge, of respect and of exploration of values, where students develop their own identities and sense of place in the world. We believe all state-funded schools should:

1. Operate admissions policies that take no account of pupils’ – or their parents’ – religion or beliefs.

2. Operate recruitment and employment policies that do not discriminate on the grounds of religion or belief.

3. Follow an objective, fair and balanced syllabus for education about religious and non-religious beliefs – whether determined by their local authority or by any future national syllabus or curriculum for RE.

4. Be made accountable under a single inspection regime for RE, Personal, Social & Health Education (PSHE) and Citizenship.

5. Provide their pupils with inclusive, inspiring and stimulating assemblies in place of compulsory acts of worship.

And we commit to work with each other locally and nationally to turn public support for inclusive education into a campaign for reform that the government cannot ignore.

Related Articles

David Trimble Predicts Peter Robinson’s Resignation

Published January 10, 2010 News Leave a Comment
Tags: ,

Conservative peer Lord Trimble feels that Peter Robinson has reached the end of the line as First Minister. 

Speaking to the BBC, Lord Trimble said the DUP leader had “lost his authority within the party and the system”.

“If he is going to fight to clear his name, then the place to do that is from the back benches,” he said.

Why Peter Robinson Must Resign

Published January 8, 2010 Opinion 17 Comments
Tags: ,

Last night, after watching the BBC Spotlight investigation into “Robinsongate” I felt it was self-evident why Peter Robinson should resign.  This morning I hear calls from senior politicians – like Sir Reg Empey, Leader of the UUP, and David Ford, Leader of the Alliance Party – that Iris Robinson should leave political office immediately.  However, that’s not enough.  The First Minister should resign and all senior politicians should call upon him to do so. 

Sir Reg, on BBC Radio Ulster this morning, was typically analytical – calling for a transcript of the programme and suggesting that investigations might be required.  However, for Sir Reg’s benefit, let me make clear why Peter Robinson must resign as First Minister.

Clause IX of the Northern Ireland Executive Ministerial Code of Conduct states that Ministers should “declare any personal or business interests which may conflict with their responsibilities. The Assembly will retain a Register of Interests. Individuals must ensure that any direct or indirect pecuniary interests [my emphasis] which members of the public might reasonably think could influence their judgement are listed in the Register of Interests.”

In short, the code makes clear that all Ministers – including the First Minister – must put his public duty ahead of his private duty.  It was clear that he did not. 

Neither Peter Robinson nor his wife made the authorities aware that Iris was accepting cash donations from property developers to support her lover’s business venture.

According to last night’s programme, Peter Robinson, while he may only have discovered in March last year that his wife was having an affair, was aware that his wife had been funding Kirk McCambley. 

It would appear from last night’s programme that Mr Robinson, eventually, insisted that his wife return this money to the property developers who provided it.  However, he made no public acknowledgement, at the time he was made aware of it, that his wife was involved in Mr McCambley’s business.  He therefore breached the Ministerial Code of Conduct.

Moreover, as someone in high political office, it must surely have seemed odd to Mr Robinson that a personal friend of the Robinson family – Kirk McCambley – was considered the only suitable candidate for the Lock Keeper’s Inn by Castlereagh Council, when Mr Robinson will have been aware that Mr McCambley had been bank-rolled by his wife.  Moreover, surely questions must have arisen in Mr Robinson’s mind (unless he was fully aware of the situation) when a personal friend of his wife’s was awarded the tenancy of the Lock Keeper’s Inn by the Council – a council upon which his wife served. 

In short, if the programme was accurate last night, and Mr Robinson was aware of his wife’s pecuniary interest in Mr McCambley, and failed to highlight this, he was in breach of the Code.  He was also in breach of the Code by not making the authorities aware that his wife had failed to declare her pecuniary interest in Mr McCambley’s business to Castlereagh Council, The Northern Ireland Assembly and to the authorities at Westminster. 

If he fails to resign the Northern Ireland Executive will lose all credibility – as well as all politicians who fail to call for his resignation.

Peter Robinson Must Resign

Published January 7, 2010 Opinion 5 Comments
Tags: ,

Darragh McIntyre’s expose of the deceit, financial impropriety and lack of disclosure on the part of Iris Robinson MP, MLA and Councillor, on tonight’s BBC Spotlight, was devastating. 

McIntyre constructed a picture of a silly and manipulative woman.  But he also exposed the degree to which this couple – First Minister and his wife – treated the democratic system with contempt. 

Peter Robinson must resign immediately.  His position is untenable.

The Robinsons: Hubris and the Pentecost

Published January 7, 2010 Opinion 3 Comments
Tags: , , ,

The Robinson scandal – at its personal, sexual level – is an interesting study in the modus operandi of Christian fundamentalists.  Peter Robinson’s chest-beating soliloquy yesterday made clear he was a husband wronged by a wrong-doing wife. 

Fionola Meredith, writing in the Guardian today, neatly summarises the Pentecostal psyche when she suggests, “Many Ulster evangelicals have an ingrained mistrust of what they see as women’s vicious, conniving, sexual ways. In this view, evangelical women must still enact the story of poor, crazy Eve: weak, in need of male supervision and control, easy prey to temptation and deficient in moral capacity. So Iris seemingly fits in neatly there. Meanwhile, Peter Robinson stands free and clear as the wronged husband, grieved and dignified in his study, alongside a card from his children saying what a great dad he is.”

But there is a consensus emerging within the media that there is a bigger story here than Iris’ lust and physical temptation (although suggestions that Iris’ lover is a young chap is keeping the Twittering classes busy). 

The Times Online is now running the line that the “going public” was precipitated by BBC Spotlight’s Darragh McIntyre getting oh so close to the bone with questioning about financial matters.  The media has taken note – like the rest of us – that Peter made no attempt to clear his wife’s name of financial wrong-doing when given the chance, in front of the media, yesterday.  The BBC bulletins this morning were leading with the fact that many questions were left unresolved following yesterday’s media event. 

Many commentators are using the hubris word.  And there is a sense that the Robinsons, jet-setting around, interior designing, multi-jobbing and moralising had it coming to them.  It’s not just the Jesus stuff…it’s the lavish life-style, employing family members, living it up and generally forgetting their roots – at the tax-payer’s expense.  In short, the Robinsons, in the midst of their fun, have been making waves and enemies.  And, ironically, in the midst of all of this, an affair seems like a very handy smoke-screen.  In the scheme of things it isn’t that big a deal.  There are bigger, more fundamental, fish to fry. 

A suggestion was made on an RTE programme today that the Gay movement was so incensed about Iris’ comments about the vileness of homosexuality that a personality hit-man had been put on the case to take the lady down.  Spotlight has been doing its stuff.  The media has been drawing attention to their expenses (and bloggers have provided a few microscopes).  Then there are the suggestions that Peter was going to make the DUP more secular and more relevant for people turned off by sectarian politics.  However, if anything, he’s been scrambling to make the organisation even more Ulster-Talibanic in response to the TUV’s fundamentalism.

But perhaps I’m being naive but I sense that this is the beginning of the end of the old Northern Ireland.  We might well be on the verge of a great breakthrough.  At last people will be forced to see these people for what they are.  And it’s not just the Robinsons.  There is more to the Adams Brothers story to come out.

Northern Ireland is like anywhere else.  People who put themselves forward as being morally superior, grand-standing on their sacred alters, supported by their castes, are, often, just riding the pig’s back.  

Therefore it’s not just about hubris.  It’s about people being seen for what they are regardless of who they are or how pious they are. 

And God may be summoned to forgive them but he won’t be good for much else.

Problems with the Robinsons

Published January 6, 2010 News , Opinion 15 Comments
Tags: , , ,

Thanks to Iain Dale for Making the Following Post #1 on his Daley Dozen

I watched both the UTV and BBC NI coverage of the Peter & Iris Robinson “affair” story on the evening bulletins and the difference in style could not have been more stark.  I’ll ask some rhetorical questions about why that should be the case later in this post.

But let’s focus on the style of reporting, first of all.  UTV had Ken Reid and Darwin Templeton – Ken being the station’s old hack and Darwin being the DUP apparatchik Editor of the News Letter.  At one point I was half expecting Soviet broadcasting mood music to be played over Ken Reid’s narration of the story as UTV used still photos of the couple in their early years as they doted on each other – contrasting with the contrite statement from Iris admitting her affair and her husband’s near-tearful public expose of their marital problems.  Ken and Darwin gave the DUP leader an easy ride.  There was scant sign of any hard-nosed journalistic rigour. 

Meanwhile the BBC’s approach was much less reverential.  Mark Devenport made clear, in interview with Noel Thompson and Donna Traynor, that the BBC Spotlight team had been conducting an investigation into financial impropriety surrounding Iris.  Her own statement made clear that she had encouraged friends to support her lover in a business venture.  Peter Robinson, when responding to questions put to him re. financial impropriety, stated that he had no involvement in any shady dealings  – but he failed to clear his wife of any wrong-doing in his responses.  It would appear that the BBC Spotlight team is still awaiting formal responses from the Robinsons re. written questions that have been submitted.

Hanging in the air, therefore, is why have the Robinson’s taken so long to go public with this story?  According to Peter he was made aware that his wife was having an affair back in March last year – and it was at this point that his wife became emotionally unstable.  However, according to unconfirmed reports the Robinsons were made aware of the BBC investigation around 10 days ago.  This may explain why the story about Iris’ affair has broken now – so long after it was made known to her husband. 

Peter Robinson’s humiliation in coming clean about his wife’s impropriety was clear in this evening’s news.  The couple has set themselves up as God fearing, and Iris, in particular, has hectored homosexuals about their sinful behaviour while she has been having extra marital sex that, on her own admission, “had no emotional or lasting meaning” to her.  In less Godly circles that might be referred to as no strings sex.  But the strings they are aplenty. 

Had this couple been less judgemental, less morally interfering, and less money-grasping in their multi-jobbing political lives we may have been able to muster more sympathy.  They have made their marital bed. 

I look forward to the next episode.

Peter and Iris Robinson’s Food Bill

Published May 15, 2009 News Leave a Comment
Tags: , , , , ,

In the latest of its revelations the Daily Telegraph has exposed husband and wife team Peter and Iris (“homosexuality viler than child abuse”) Robinson’s food and expense claims. 

The Telegraph makes clear that the Robinsons have not broken any rules.  However, given the amount of time that the couple actually spends on Commons business one really has to question the value for money that local tax-payers are receiving from this quadruple-jobbing money-making machine. 

The couple has claimed nearly £200,000 of mortgage/food expenses related to their London home since 2004.  However, in the last year, Peter Robinson has only spoken in six debates.  He has only voted in 37% of votes – “well below average for most MPs” according to the site TheyWorkForYou.com  It would also appear that only one person has commented on things he has said in his speeches. 

But if Peter’s attendance history is bad, Iris rarely shows to speak or to vote in debates.  She has only spoken in 4 debates in the last year and has voted in just 28% of divisions. 

So while all these expenses are AOK as far as the fees office is concerned one really has to wonder why the Robinsons need to saddle the taxpayer with the costs for all these meals and hundreds of thousands of pounds of mortgage payments on a luxury docklands pad.  After all, they rarely turn-up, rarely vote and rarely speak.

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 32 other followers

Subscribe in a reader

Musings on things political and secular…

This is my site where I share my world views for anyone who might be remotely interested. Visit only if you think the content is interesting. Oh and comment is free. So go right ahead and agree or disagree. But, please, be kind and polite (especially to me).
Add to Technorati Favorites
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 32 other followers