Debate contribution: Ministerial Code of Conduct

Debate contribution by Mr Matthew O'Toole on 10 February 2026.

MLA

Mr Matthew O'Toole

Party at the time

Social Democratic and Labour Party

Date

10 February 2026

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Opposition Business

Heading

Ministerial Code of Conduct

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5435237

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I beg to move

Thank you, Mr Speaker. We are just over two years on from the restoration of the institutions, and it is fair to say that the public have not been overwhelmed by the performance of our restored Executive. It is also true that part of that lack of trust comes from a sense that people who take office here, particularly those in ministerial office, feel that they are immune to or insulated from accountability. However, in those two years, there has been a step change: an improvement in accountability through the establishment of an official Opposition. We have consistently used our time constructively but robustly to put Ministers on notice that accountability starts here. I see that the Minister for Communities is already laughing, which is an indication of how seriously he — a man found twice in breach of the ministerial code — takes the matter that is before the Assembly today. As part of the opposition role, we have consistently put Ministers on notice that we will hold them to account, but we will also try to effect a broader improvement in our political culture and in trust in politics in Northern Ireland. Revelations in recent weeks, far beyond Northern Ireland, have illustrated that there is broad crisis in trust in politics here and around the democratic world. Nearly everywhere, trust in politics and politicians is at a dangerous low. Some, perhaps much, of that derives from misinformation and outright disinformation stirred up online on social media by malign and ill-intentioned actors at home and abroad with the connivance of social media platforms that have no interest in defending healthy democracy and democratic structures. Some of the crisis is legitimately borne of deep and widespread frustration with growing inequality, with wages simply not delivering a decent life for so many in our society and with a political system that has not or will not respond to that frustration. There is also a real sense that too many politicians give the impression that they believe themselves to be above accountability. We in Northern Ireland often act as if our specific history and specific institutions mean that we are insulated from broader changes in democratic attitudes, as if our divided society and communal voting patterns rendered objective accountability and standards processes trivial and secondary. That has certainly been the DUP's response in recent years. Elections are, of course, the ultimate form of accountability, but we are also — at least ,we should be — accountable between elections. That is particularly the case for Ministers, who have legal powers to spend public money and instruct public servants. That is why the contentious attitude of Minister Gordon Lyons to two separate findings of standards breaches — breaches of the ministerial code — is so disappointing and extraordinary. It comes after the contemptuous response of his party colleague Paul Givan to a vote of no confidence that was brought to the Chamber under the relevant section of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 following his indefensible use of official departmental resources in his visit to the occupied territories. It is no exaggeration to say that those matters have been among a handful of top issues on which my constituents have corresponded with me in my time in politics. Those two separate breaches and the public outrage not just at the initial actions but at the failure of those Ministers even to express any self-awareness, let alone contrition, have, as I said, been among the most intense and overwhelming things that my constituents have communicated with me about — outraged. In June last year, at a time when migrants and vulnerable groups feared for their lives, Minister Lyons posted a notorious Facebook message in which he confirmed — this is important: I acknowledge that he confirmed it, as he will, no doubt, say in response, as he has before, that it had been revealed elsewhere — that migrants had been moved to Larne Leisure Centre, which, at that point, was a site of growing protest. I repeat: that was at a time when migrant communities just up the road in Ballymena had been experiencing something approaching a pogrom. The standards commissioner felt that Minister Lyons, who was not only the MLA for East Antrim but the serving housing Minister, had likely:

"heightened tensions and contributed to further unrest".

A plain reading of the post suggests that the Minister's priority was not to strongly urge protesters to stay away from Larne Leisure Centre but to distance himself and his party from knowledge of the location of the vulnerable people who had been rehoused. There was not one word of empathy or concern for the well-being of those families, who had reason to fear for their safety and perhaps even their lives. It is no surprise, then, that the standards commissioner found that the Minister had breached two different rules under the ministerial code. We know what Minister Lyon's response has been. Broadly speaking, it is fair to say that he has shown contempt towards the findings and has been dismissive of accountability, which is not entirely unlike his attitude in 2024, when he was found to have breached the code in relation to non-attendance at North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC) meetings. Of course, on that occasion, as with the vote of no confidence in Minister Givan before Christmas, his party colleagues were able to nullify any accountability because the current rules give the DUP and, indeed, Sinn Féin an effective veto over votes of no confidence and censure motions of any kind. That is unlike the situation faced by Mr Gaston, who has been treated somewhat differently. I assume that he will be outraged by the difference between his treatment under the rules and that of Ministers, because no sanction can be effected for a serving DUP Minister. It is worth saying that, in a healthy political culture, repeated breaches of the ministerial code would engage a sense of honour or shame. Sadly, not only has the Minister not resigned but he has not seen fit to apologise or offer even one word of reflection or learning. I genuinely think that lots of people would have viewed the Minister's reaction and his position differently had he, at least, acknowledged that things could have been done differently or that his words could have been used more appropriately. It is that failure to even acknowledge why others might have had difficulty with his post that has infuriated so many. This is the same Minister who yesterday called other people "petty" for refusing to indulge the criminal, authoritarian President Donald Trump. It is no wonder that people from all political backgrounds frequently say to me, "You could not redden their necks". Today we are doing more than simply tabling a vote of no confidence under the Northern Ireland Act, because we know that the DUP would be able to nullify that; we are giving the Assembly an opportunity to register its condemnation of Minister Lyons's breach, vote no confidence in him as a result of that and take positive action. I can almost predict how Minister Lyons will respond, though I will keep my fingers crossed. I want the Assembly to take positive action, because it is clear that our standards system is not fit for purpose and needs to be improved. I assume that Mr Gaston, who, just a few moments ago, was lambasting the standards system, agrees with that point. The outgoing standards commissioner outlined a range of ways by which the standards system could be improved, but the motion is part of a broader effort to reform our politics, because one thing is clear to every Member in the Chamber: the public have had enough of the way that we do business. We cannot go on like this, with the Executive collapsing at the drop of a hat; Ministers who feel immune to any kind of accountability; public services that are getting worse, not better; and an approach to government that simply treats the public with contempt when they ask for clear targets and delivery in a Programme for Government. We cannot go on like this. We ask the Assembly to collectively endorse not just an improvement in the standards processes — we have specific proposals on that, including changing the threshold for a veto when it comes to censure — but a broader programme of reform that makes it harder to collapse the institutions, ensures that we do not have a vacuum in governance in this place and that neither the DUP nor Sinn Féin can take advantage of that and, more broadly, improves the culture. It is about saying to the British and Irish Governments, "We know that we cannot go on like this, and we want to work with you to improve and change it". We think that that is doable and essential. A final word — we hear laughs across the Chamber from Mr Burrows, who has talked a lot in recent weeks about improving accountability. If the Ulster Unionist Party is serious about improving accountability, there is no reason at all that it cannot vote for the motion.

I will not, because I do not have time. I will respond to the Member later in the debate. I will be happy to give way later on. The Member has talked a lot in broadcast outlets across Northern Ireland about the need to improve accountability: I agree with him. That starts now. Let us vote for the motion.

1,588 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:33 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification