Debate contribution: Hospital Parking Charges Bill: Final Stage

Debate contribution by Mr Matthew O'Toole on 20 April 2026.

MLA

Mr Matthew O'Toole

Party at the time

Social Democratic and Labour Party

Date

20 April 2026

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Executive Committee Business

Heading

Hospital Parking Charges Bill: Final Stage

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5494041

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I was not going to speak, since my colleague Colin McGrath covered the issues fairly comprehensively, but I felt the need to do so, given that a particular area of the Bill has not yet been reflected on. There were comments made by some Members earlier that can be contextualised by a document that was published in 2024. We were fairly scathing of the Bill when it was introduced and when it was debated at its Second Reading. That is not because we think that the Health Minister is being cynical. I appreciate the position that he has been put in. The other day, however, I was at home watching a television programme with my eight-year-old son. I was trying to get him not to watch YouTube. We were talking about something, and I managed to convince him to watch an old comedy. We watched an episode of 'Fawlty Towers'. Sometimes what goes on in this place makes 'Fawlty Towers' look like a documentary, because the situation is well and truly Fawltyesque, Pythonesque or, perhaps, Kafkaesque. We have arrived at a preposterous situation. The last thing that we did in a previous mandate was make a promise to healthcare workers, staff of all kinds — medical staff, porters and ancillary staff — and people suffering from illnesses and their immediate families that they would not have to face the burden of parking charges. The final legislative act before we left the Chamber in 2022 was to pass that Bill, and the first act when we came back, other than to pass a routine Budget Bill, was to delay its implementation. That is preposterous: it is not acceptable, and it needs to be called out, and that is what the official Opposition have done. I am not 100% sure that there would have been a Division or that Sinn Féin would have voted against the Bill at Second Stage had we not forced a Division. It is important that we challenge some of the remarkable statements that have been made today. The Bill could not have made it to the House had the First Minister and her party not agreed to it in the Executive. That is a fact. I am happy to take an intervention if someone wants to correct me, but that has been established as fact. The First Minister and, indeed, the junior Minister who sponsored the Bill in the previous mandate agreed to this Bill. Their party are now saying, "This is awful. How did this awful Bill make it to the House?". We have a credibility problem in the Assembly. That credibility problem gets worse when we say such things and when we claim that we are not responsible for our actions. That is part of the reason why the public have such low trust in us. There is a question not only about how the Bill made it to the Floor —

I will in one second. There is a question about previous statements that have been made. The previous Finance Minister, Caoimhe Archibald, published a document in October 2024 after the Executive restoration settlement in February 2024. Part of that agreement with the British Government concerned revenue-raising options. Some Members here who were on the Finance Committee then and who are on it now will know that the Department of Finance published a document entitled 'Budget Sustainability Plan'. It was the then Finance Minister and the broader Executive's plan to raise revenue as per that agreement. By the way, that is still live Executive policy. If Members go to appendix D of the document, which, as I said, the Department of Finance, under the then Finance Minister, Caoimhe Archibald, published, they will see that it sets out detailed tables on revenue-raising options. That is the Executive saying, "This is the revenue we're raising to meet our commitments under the Executive restoration package". If one scrolls down, one gets to a line that states "Car Parking Charges", and there is a figure of £6 million attached. In the comments, it is stated:

"The Hospital Parking Charges Act (NI) 2022 prohibited the imposition of charges for parking vehicles in hospital car parks and became operative on 12th May 2024. The NI Assembly have passed a Bill to defer the removal of charges for 2 years. Maintaining Car Park charges will save £6m of revenue which otherwise would have been lost."

That is from the Department of Finance, which has been led by two successive Sinn Féin Finance Ministers, who are scoring that revenue from delaying the Bill. Do not therefore come into the Chamber and discredit politics and devolution by saying, "Nothing to do with us. We have nothing to do with this. We deplore this awful Bill, which we allowed on to the Floor, and whose revenue we have already scored in a document published by the Department of Finance", because it is not serious and it is not credible. People who were promised the change deserve honesty and responsibility from our politicians. I am now happy to give way to Mrs Dillon.

The straight answer is yes, but, of course, there is always context and there are always circumstances. My answer is a yes, but, since I allowed the intervention, let me explain in detail what I mean by that. I think yes, but, of course, it is then disingenuous to come to the House and act as through you had nothing do with this, that your party has no awareness of it, that you are not leading the Executive and that you do not have the First Minister and the Finance Minister, who have not dissented from this, and —

— pretend that you have no responsibility for it. I will give way to Mr McGuigan in a second.

You cannot never take responsibility for the power that you have. That is part of the reason why our politics are in the state that they are in. There is a particular challenge for those of us who are trying to advocate for a new Ireland, because we need to be credible. We are putting forward a proposition for change on this island. That requires credibility and taking responsibility, not this kind of Monty Python behaviour. I give way to Mr McGuigan.

1,048 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:26 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