Mr Ervine spoke on the day of Mr Mallon's resignation, and he was at his sanctimonious best. Did he talk about how disappointed, frightened and worried he was about the consequences of the offer of resignation? No. He talked about the consequences of the resignation, and he went on to describe the death of the political process.

Will the Member give way?

No. You have been doing all the giving away in the last month or two. Mr Ervine obviously believed that Mr Mallon had resigned. Ms McWilliams talked about her position on this and was happy to accept an offer of resignation. She talked about how wonderful Mr Mallon had been in his efforts to pursue the peace process. She said

I could go through what others said. The Ulster Unionist Party, of course, were not here; they decided to run away because they were not ready to move to the despicable position that they are at today. Mr Mallon's words - what he said about his personal standing - were heard in the Assembly, were reported in the House of Commons by the Secretary of State and were made known to the public. The headline in the 'Belfast Telegraph' said "Mallon resigns"; the 'News Letter' used the same terminology. Of course, we cannot believe everything we read in the 'News Letter', but on this occasion it confirmed what everyone else was saying. So there was an element of truth in it.

Today's motion, as has been outlined very well by my Colleague Peter Robinson and by Mr McCartney, seeks to pretend that there was only an offer of resignation, for the simple reason that otherwise the rules would not allow us to go through the majority voting procedure that will occur at the end of this debate.

All of this twisting and turning is to place in the Government of Northern Ireland people who, for the last 30 years, have killed, maimed and bombed. Many people will find it incomprehensible that the leader of the Ulster Unionist Party said that he wished to hurry along, to get to the main part of the business - to place those people in government. That is despicable. It makes this a farce and is something the people in Northern Ireland will not forgive, especially those who have been victims.

I ask you to bring your remarks to a close.

When people outside watch this Assembly and listen to what has been going on, I wonder what they will think. Up to the moment we have had the spectacle of those who perhaps do not understand the meaning of the word "democracy"; and they certainly do not want to put it into practice. Their wish is for the voice of the people to be thwarted or overturned. If more than 71% of the people had voted "No" to the agreement the Members on the Benches to my left would be perfectly happy and content. Sadly that was not the fact. They were defeated - not for the first time, and certainly not for the last.

I hear them quote strange figures, but I understand that the figure was 71·2%. We are speaking about the will of the people. Let us learn how to accept the will of the people - [Interruption] If the echoes were to die down I might be able to get on to the real substance of the motion.

This motion is very clear. It restates the obvious: that the Assembly wishes Seamus Mallon to hold office as Deputy First Minister (Designate). This is not some fairy-tale wish; it is a wish based on hard statistical facts. Mr Mallon was elected Deputy First Minister (Designate) on 1 July 1998, and the voting on that day was 61 votes for and 27 votes against - 69·3% for and 30·7% against. That is over two to one in favour. That was the will of the House, and, from that day until 15 July 1999, Seamus Mallon carried out his duties in an admirable fashion - a fact that was recognised by the vast majority of Members.

Then, on 15 July 1999, in order, as he saw it, to

Mr Mallon offered his resignation. Some people might want to wish it otherwise, but the fact remains that he offered his resignation.

Mr Mallon has emphasised the point that the offer to resign was made to the Assembly. It was, after all, as has already been pointed out, the Assembly that elected him. I believe that it is a fact of law, though I am prepared to concede to those better qualified in the legal profession, that an offer is made for acceptance or rejection. I do not see it said in Hansard that the Assembly refused to accept that offer. It was pointed out, in response to a question from Mr Peter Robinson, that there were no procedures, no Standing Orders and no opportunities for the House to discuss or debate that offer. The record demonstrates very clearly that there was much regret and sadness, and this is evidence that it is the will and the desire of the House that Mr Mallon continue as Deputy First Minister (Designate). Even some of those who are absent from the Chamber now, who were opposed to his election, expressed their sadness at his offer to resign.

I take this opportunity to assert my right as a Member of the Assembly to reject Mr Mallon's offer to resign. I believe that, as an Assembly, we can collectively confirm our desire, first voted upon and agreed in July 1998, that Mr Mallon hold office as Deputy First Minister (Designate) of the House. In so doing we can and will move forward and make progress and thus meet the demand of the greater majority of the people who want to see us making progress.

When we make that progress later this evening we will see pseudo-reluctant Ministers, with tears in their eyes, coming forward and grabbing with both hands the portfolios offered and the trappings of office. Then, with their usual dignity and, some might say, hypocrisy, they will ride off and claim that they are doing this for the salvation of Ulster. It reminds me of the old cliché

I make no apology for opposing the motion to reinstate Seamus Mallon as Deputy First Minister (Designate). Mr Mallon refuses to recognise Northern Ireland's status as an integral part of the United Kingdom and consistently insults our people by referring to Northern Ireland as "the North of Ireland". I refuse to accept a Deputy First Minister (Designate) who wants the destruction of Northern Ireland, wants it subsumed into an all-Ireland republic. Mr Mallon and the SDLP have consistently opposed any devolved Government which will maintain Northern Ireland's position as an integral part of the United Kingdom and which excludes terrorists.

During 30 years of terror the SDLP consistently condemned violence while not hesitating to profit politically from it. The SDLP tells us that we should forget the past. Will John Hume and his party now state publicly that "bloody Sunday" is a thing of the past and best left there? The SDLP now faces a clear choice between support for democracy and the rule of law and support for Sinn Féin/IRA in its demand to participate in the Executive, while retaining its arsenal and its terrorist structures. If the SDLP supports Sinn Féin/IRA in its refusal to decommission, this will render it indistinguishable from Sinn Féin/IRA. The alternative is for the SDLP to align itself with the democratic demand that Sinn Féin/IRA must decommission its terrorist arsenal and dismantle its terrorist structures. Pan- Nationalism, for which Seamus Mallon is a key strategist, has never flinched from its agenda of power-sharing with an Irish dimension, leading to Irish unity. Placing Seamus Mallon in the position of Deputy First Minister (Designate) is part of the pan-Nationalist agenda.

Sinn Féin/IRA, a key part of the pan-Nationalist front, are not democrats. They have arrived where they are today not by legitimate means but through murder and intimidation. The threat of more bombs in the business centre of London has forced the British Government to capitulate. The Republican definition of democracy is to explode a bomb underneath a car or gun down opposing politicians. The clear message today is that victims still suffer. There must be no terrorists in government. The victims' agony is compounded by allowing unrepentant armed killers and their apologists into our Government.

A policy of appeasement of Fascists was tried in the 1930s, and it failed. This Government has also turned a blind eye. Today Tony Blair, in a style reminiscent of Chamberlain, preaches "peace for our time". If only we could turn a blind eye to the ongoing murders and beatings. Just like Germany in the pre-war period, the IRA continues to build up its arsenal. They have peace on their lips but war in their hearts.

The Belfast Agreement has delivered nothing for Unionists. Our Loyal Order parades are banned and our culture attacked. The terrorists continue to be released. The sniper team which murdered seven British soldiers and two RUC officers will serve only 13 months. The killer of retired RUC Reservist Cyril Stewart, who was gunned down in front of his wife while out shopping, will serve only nine months. This is not peace, justice and democracy; this is appeasement. We face the destruction of the RUC and the prospect of terrorists in control of policing. Eighty per cent of IRA murders are unsolved, and we have continual human rights abuses by Sinn Féin/IRA. Since 10 April 1998 there have been five IRA murders, 62 shootings, 160 beatings and 464 exilings - all carried out by paramilitaries associated with pro-agreement parties. The statistics relating to Loyalist terrorists are similar. Martin McGuinness is on record as having said on 23 June 1986

He also stated

This is clear evidence that Martin McGuinness is a member of the Provisional IRA. Yet he is to take a place in the Government of Northern Ireland. Republicans have murdered over 2,000 people - both Protestant and Catholic - and Loyalists have murdered over 1,000. Yet these organisations are still fully intact and retain their illegal guns and explosives.

The back-stepping by pro-agreement parties and the naive acceptance by some Ulster Unionists of a meaningless form of words on decommissioning will do nothing to ease the concerns of the long-suffering people of Northern Ireland. In all this charade the real victims of terror have been forgotten.

The reality is that there are enough illegal arms and explosives to kill every person in Northern Ireland. Republican terrorists are estimated to have 2,658 kg of Semtex, 1,200 detonators, 1,000 rifles, 40 sub-machine guns and 30 machine guns. After 600 days not one ounce of Semtex has been handed in. Republican terrorists are also estimated to have 600 handguns and 1·5 million rounds of ammunition as well as ground-to-air missiles, RPG 7 launchers and two Barrett Light Fifty rifles. Loyalist terrorist arsenals include 100 rifles, 80 sub-machine guns, and 700 handguns. Yet as democrats, we have to listen to people saying that we are not in favour of peace, justice and democracy.

A phoney commitment by the IRA to decommissioning is an insult to the people of Northern Ireland - particularly to the forgotten victims. The Union is in crisis, and a split within the Ulster Unionist party is inevitable if David Trimble pursues his reckless policy of attempting to place the representatives of terrorism in government. It is time for anti-agreement Unionists within the Ulster Unionist Party to realign with other like-minded Unionists to prevent Sinn Féin/IRA from being placed in the Executive.

We should all be reminded of the dastardly deeds of the Provisional IRA. On 19 April 1972 Corporal "A"- I shall refer to him in that way for the sake of his family - who was a UDR member, was abducted whilst driving a lorry along the Armagh and Republic of Ireland border. His badly tortured body, which was booby-trapped, was found at Altnamachin near Newtownhamilton. He suffered a terrible death at the hands of his IRA captors following his abduction and imprisonment at an IRA safe house in County Monaghan.

On a point of order, Mr Initial Presiding Officer. Is Mr Boyd speaking to the motion? [Interruption] Someone asks if he is reading his essay.

TOP

The speech seems to be some distance from the terms of the motion. Perhaps you could relate your remarks more closely to those terms, Mr Boyd.

Earlier in the debate Gerry Adams gave us a lecture on seventeenth-century Presbyterianism. I think that my speech is just as relevant to the motion, if not more so.

You must forgive me if I gave a degree of latitude to matters relating to Presbyterianism. Please proceed in relation to the motion.

Corporal "A" suffered a terrible death at the hands of his IRA captors following his abduction and imprisonment at an IRA safe house in County Monaghan. It is alleged that he was nailed to the floor during his ordeal. Following his torture, which included burns, shocks, drowning and a variety of horrific abuses, he was finally shot. His genitals were placed in his mouth, and his stomach was removed and replaced with a booby-trap bomb. This was carried out by an organisation which our Prime Minister says is inextricably linked to Sinn Féin. They are one and the same.

On 25 May 1986 the Garda informed the RUC of the location of the body of Mr "D", an IRA informer. He was found with his hands tied behind his back, tape covering his eyes and a bullet wound to his head. At the request of Martin McGuinness - who in a few hours' time will be a Minister in this Government - the mother of this victim helped to persuade her son to come home to Londonderry following an assurance from the Sinn Féin leader that he would be safe. When he had been home for two weeks, he was taken away by the IRA to County Donegal, never to return. Severe mental and physical torture was used on this victim.

These evil people would have the world believe that they are fighting the just war of an oppressed people, but all the emerging evidence is that they are carrying out a psychopathic serial killing campaign against those with whom they disagree politically and, indeed, against any who would dare to stand in the way of their achieving their true objective - a united Ireland governed by fear and violence.

As a democrat, I make reasonable and legitimate demands on behalf of the victims and all those who believe in democracy and the rule of law. We demand a declaration from the IRA that the war is over; the handover of the terrorists' arsenals; the ballistic testing of the terrorists' weaponry; the verified destruction of the terrorists' arsenals; the disbandment of the terrorist organisations; the setting-up by Her Majesty's Government of a public inquiry into human-rights abuses by the terrorists; and an international tribunal to investigate the role of the Government of the Irish Republic in the establishment, funding, training and arming of Sinn Féin/IRA. The victims still suffer, and the clear message is that there must be no terrorists in government -

There may be some misunderstanding with reference to some comments made earlier. I have been trying to understand what link there is between this and the motion. I have to assume that there is the thought that if Mr Mallon does not find himself in the position of Deputy First Minister (Designate), that will obstruct the running of the d'Hondt mechanism and the appointments to which the Member refers.

In case there is any uncertainty on that issue, let me be clear on the point that whatever happens in respect of this motion, the running of the d'Hondt mechanism will take place. I assume that that is the connection between what the Member has said and this motion, and I draw this matter to the Member's attention lest he should spend the remainder of his time addressing a question which is not in order.

While what you have said is true, it is also true to say that if the 10 members of the Executive are appointed today the Executive cannot take over devolved government unless it is ordered so to do by the First Minister (Designate) and the Deputy First Minister (Designate). If we do not have a First Minister (Designate) and a Deputy First Minister (Designate) what we do today cannot come into operation. Therefore the hon Gentleman has every right to argue that if the IRA has to get into government in this way he is opposed to it.

He does. However, to carry forward the procedure you are describing, it would be entirely possible for the d'Hondt mechanism to be applied, for 10 Ministers to be put into place, and for there then to be an election of the First Minister (Designate) and the Deputy First Minister (Designate). I am making this point in case the Member feels that his speech is directed towards the motion, when it seems to me that this is not entirely the case. The Member may continue.

But it is in the right direction because if Mr Mallon does not succeed in getting back the position of Deputy First Minister (Designate) the Executive can never be called together.

That is true in terms of the Executive's actually meeting, barring some other development.

Another change.

I would like to return to the issue of Members on the opposite side of the Chamber naming individuals in this Chamber today. The Initial Presiding Officer rebuked Mr Paisley Jnr on the matter of the integrity of Members in this Chamber. I am concerned that, although few Members will take much notice of some of the comments and drivel that we have been hearing from some Members today, there has been too much latitude given to some Members with regard to allegations they have been making. I do not know whether the people against whom the allegations have been made are that concerned. However, the Initial Presiding Officer made a ruling concerning the questioning of the integrity of Members, and far too much latitude has been given. I want to put on record that people have been defamed in the Chamber this afternoon. We will all be carefully scrutinising Hansard tomorrow morning because some of the comments that have been allowed have been absolutely disgraceful.

As I have said on a number of occasions, I listen as carefully as I can to all the things being said, as they are being said, and I also scrutinise Hansard afterwards. It is not an easy task because sometimes things are said which raise questions, including questions about particular parliamentary procedure. I try to keep my mind focused, and I do try to get constant legal advice. I will certainly be scrutinising Hansard after this - and not only because you will be doing so too.

That is all very well. However, some Members could stray - and perhaps some Members do not have a lot of experience - and inadvertently make a comment. Some Members are reading from lengthy scripts which are entirely defamatory and personal towards members of Sinn Féin. These are not accidental comments. They are well-prepared and well-delivered scripts. It is painfully obvious that this is so.

Can you confirm that if any Member feels aggrieved and you are not able to give him justice, he can appeal to the court and fight his case there?

No, I cannot confirm that, since comments made in this context now have privilege, although they initially did not. It is important that Members do not abuse their rights. My attention has been drawn to the question of whether this might be the case. I will therefore scrutinise the matter carefully.

On a point of order, Mr Initial Presiding Officer. Have you heard anything new today which has not been said about these people outside this House? And no one has been taken to court.

On a point of order. It might be useful if you could give us some guidance in this matter. In the House of Commons, for instance, one might well believe that a Minister or other individual has told a lie, but one may not call that person a liar. If we believe that someone has been responsible for murder, may we not call him a murderer?

That is something I shall have to consider, since it is probably unparliamentary language. What you say also has other implications. I shall need to study it before coming back to the Assembly. I think we were at the point of calling Mr Neeson.

On a point of order. We must be very careful of how we use language. The language associated with this so-called peace process is couched in the most general and vacuous terms, intended to lend a commendable linguistic aura to what is happening without ever addressing specifics. The question was raised, if Mr Mallon is confirmed as Deputy First Minister (Designate) and d'Hondt is triggered, of what sort of people will be governing Northern Ireland, and what these people represent.

We should be exceptionally careful that we do not place a prohibition on the use of language, which would prevent the use of concrete descriptions which can be proven. If, for example, one takes the word "murderer", its use is totally inappropriate merely as a term of abuse. When that word is used to describe what a person is and has done, however, it can be entirely appropriate.

I am not entirely sure what point of order the Member is making.

At the last meeting of the Assembly specific allegations were made against myself and other members of my party by the SDLP. I hope you will also investigate those.

I shall draw my remarks to a close. The victims are still suffering. The clear message must be that there can be no terrorists in government. The Belfast Agreement has failed in three crucial areas: there has been no decommissioning, nor will there be; over 300 terrorists have been released early; and the Patten Report will almost certainly destroy the RUC. Today we witness the death of democracy and the surrender by some Unionists to Sinn Féin/IRA. However, as Unionists, we all have to face the electorate, it is to be hoped, sooner rather than later.

In line with the pledge we gave at the election, my party and I shall continue to oppose the implementation of the Belfast Agreement and its implications. In the words of Mrs Sylvia Callaghan, whose son was murdered in the Ballykelly bombing,

I oppose the motion.

This Assembly offers the people of Northern Ireland two choices today. The first is to keep them tied to the shackles of hatred, bitterness and continued sectarian conflict. The second offers the opportunity to move forward and take us out of that conflict, providing hope for the future for all the people of Northern Ireland. In the Northern Ireland Forum, I once said that the word "yes" is not part of the DUP's vocabulary.

I am glad to see that things are changing. They will say "Yes", and rightly so, to the two ministerial posts. That underlines the hypocrisy that is emerging from the Democratic Unionist Party and the other "no" men, who are determined to take the people of Northern Ireland "no where".

This motion is about whether we accept the offer made by Mr Mallon to resign. At the outset I stated that my main reason for moving this motion was to bring about the full implementation of the Good Friday Agreement. We have waited 601 days, and I do not want us to delay any further.

Mr Initial Presiding Officer, would this motion have been passed if the proper procedure had been applied and parallel consent required?

As there was no petition of concern, a simple majority only was required, and the Clerks computed the figure. I cannot answer your question immediately - the numbers will have to be checked.

Mr Mallon, do you assent to the wish of the Assembly?

I do, and I regard this as cross-community support - the touchstone by which I measure the vote. I thank all Members, including those who spoke and/or voted against the motion. It is in the Assembly that our myriad problems will be solved. This vote allows us to move forward and start to solve those problems.

I confirm that Mr Mallon has assented to the wish of the Assembly and will hold the office of Deputy First Minister (Designate) notwithstanding his offer to resign. The outcome of the election of July last year to the office of First Minister and Deputy First Minister remains in effect.

TOP

Sinn Féin: Motion for Exclusion

May I remind Members that, while giving notice of a motion under Standing Order 24 has no specific requirements, moving such a motion requires that one of three criteria, which are set out in paragraph 5, must be met. No notice having been given under paragraph 5(b) or 5(c), I invite the sponsor to provide evidence that the criterion in paragraph 5(a) is met. I will accept written notice bearing the signatures of 30 Members, or the support of 30 Members demonstrated by their rising in their places, or a combination of those. If this criterion is met, the motion may be moved and the debate may proceed. If it is not met, I will not allow the motion to be moved and we will proceed to the appointment of Ministers (Designate).

Having already given you evidence of 29 signatures, I invite you to ask Members willing to join the signatories to stand in their places.

Will those Members who have signed the motion or are in support of it please stand in their places.

Several Members rose.

Not all of the 29 Members who signed the motion are standing - and certainly not the required 30.

On a point of order, Mr Presiding Officer. You would confirm that Standing Order 24(5)(a) allows a combination of signatures and Members rising. You have 29 signatures and are required only to find out if there are any other Members who would sign. Perhaps the Ulster Unionist Party did not fully understand this. Some of its members may want another opportunity to lend their support.

Given the clear and full explanation, they can be in little doubt about the requirements. As no one is standing in support of the motion I declare that it is not competent.

Would it be in order to have a 15-minute suspension to see if we can persuade the Secretary of State to bend the rules for the anti-agreement Unionists?

While not doubting the persuasive capacity of the Member, I have some uncertainty about whether 15 minutes would be enough. However, since no more is at my disposal, I fear I must pass up his advice.

TOP

Nomination of Ministers (Designate)

I have some advice for Members before we proceed directly to running d'Hondt. Once this procedure is commenced, it will not be interrupted except by leave of the Assembly or under the terms of Standing Order 22 whereby a nominating officer may make request for a 15-minute suspension in order to consult before making his nomination. I remind Members that, as required by Initial Standing Orders, I have, by reference to the party affiliations as indicated by Members when taking their seats, published a consolidated list of political parties represented in the Assembly, the Assembly Members belonging to each political party and the nominating officer for each party.

At the sitting of the Assembly on 16 February 1999 a joint proposal from the First Minister (Designate) and the Deputy First Minister (Designate) relating to the number of ministerial offices to be held by Northern Ireland Ministers and the functions exercisable by the holder of each such office after the appointed day was agreed with cross-community support. I am now required by Initial Standing Orders to conduct the allocation of ministerial offices (designate) in accordance with the procedures set out in Initial Standing Orders.

Before commencing, I wish to remind Members again of the requirements set out in Initial Standing Orders. I shall ask the nominating officer from each political party, in the order required by the formula contained in the Initial Standing Orders, to select an available ministerial office (designate) and to nominate a person to hold it who is a member of his party and of the Assembly. Should a nominating officer require further time to consider a selection or nomination, it is open to me to permit a brief suspension of 15 minutes. However, I should point out that if no such request is made, or if the nominating officer does not make the selection or the nomination required within a maximum period of five minutes, or if the nominee does not agree to take up the selected ministerial office (designate) within the period of five minutes, in accordance with the Initial Standing Orders, I will ask the next nominating officer in line, according to the required formula, to select and to nominate. Under the terms of the Initial Standing Orders, the First Minister (Designate) and the Deputy First Minister (Designate) may be nominated themselves to hold a ministerial office (designate).

The last time we tried this procedure Members responded spontaneously with applause after each successful nominations. I suggest that today we hold back any expressions of emotion, positive or otherwise, and if at the end of the procedure the leaders of parties wish to make a brief comment, they may do so then. That is in order that expressions of emotion during the process can be restrained.

I understand from certain Members that the amplifiers in some parts of this building were not on during the call for the first vote. I would like you to enquire into that.

I certainly will make enquiries.

I call on Mr Trimble, as the nominating officer of the political party for which the formula laid down in the Standing Orders gives the highest figure, to select a ministerial office (designate) and nominate a person to hold it who is a member of the Ulster Unionist Party and of the Assembly.

I select the Enterprise, Trade and Investment portfolio, and I wish to nominate Sir Reg Empey.

Will Sir Reg Empey confirm that he is willing to take up office?

I confirm.

I ask you to make the affirmation required.

I affirm the Pledge of Office as set out in schedule 4 to the Northern Ireland Act 1998.

Sir Reg Empey is now the Minister (Designate) of Enterprise, Trade and Investment.

I call on Mr Hume, as the nominating officer of the political party for which the formula laid down in Standing Orders gives the next highest figure, to select the ministerial portfolio and to nominate a person to hold it who is a member of the Social Democratic and Labour Party and of the Assembly.

I select Finance and Personnel and nominate Mr Mark Durkan.

Will Mr Durkan confirm that he is willing to take up office?

I confirm.

Please make the affirmation.

I affirm the Pledge of Office as set out in schedule 4 to the Northern Ireland Act 1998.

Mr Mark Durkan is now the Minister (Designate) of Finance and Personnel.

I call on Dr Paisley, as nominating officer of the political party for which the formula laid down in Standing Orders gives the next highest figure, to select a ministerial portfolio and to nominate a person to hold it who is a member of the Democratic Unionist Party and of the Assembly.

I select the Regional Development portfolio and nominate Mr Peter Robinson MP to hold it.

Will Mr Peter Robinson confirm that he is willing to take up office?

May I very briefly set the context which allows me to respond positively to your enquiry about my willingness to take office. Everyone here knows that I am one of the sternest opponents of the Belfast Agreement. I have consistently maintained that the purpose and the objective of the agreement is to have Northern Ireland absorbed into a united Ireland through developing all-Ireland institutions. I still believe that to be the process underlying it. Whether a Member or a Minister, as a convinced Unionist I shall use every ounce of the influence I possess to frustrate and thwart Northern Ireland's being conveyed into a united Ireland.

My position, in relation to both the release of paramilitary prisoners and the destruction of the RUC through the apparatus devised by the Belfast Agreement, is on public record and is unchanged. Moreover, it remains for me a fundamental principle that only those who are committed to exclusively peaceful and democratic means are suitable partners in government. The call of my conscience and the commitments I have given to the people of Northern Ireland are unalterable. I oppose terrorism in all its forms and of every shade. Whether it be the murder of a friend or that of an odious adversary, I oppose it without qualification and without any mental reservation.

As far as my conduct as a prospective Minister may be an issue, I want to place firmly on the record my intention and disposition to be scrupulously fair in every respect, while exercising such responsibilities as may be in my charge. The religious conviction or political opinion of any person or group will form no part of the judgement I will make on any matter. I shall work for everyone in this community seeking for them a better deal. I consider myself to be the servant of all and master of none.

I accept the nomination and affirm the Pledge of Office as set out in schedule 4 to the Northern Ireland Act 1998.

Mr Peter Robinson is now Minister (Designate) for Regional Development.

I call on Mr Gerry Adams, as nominating officer of the political party for which the formula laid down in Standing Orders gives the next highest figure, to select a ministerial portfolio and to nominate a person to hold it who is a member of Sinn Féin and of the Assembly.

Ainmním Máirtín MacAonghusa mar Aire Oideachais. I nominate Mr Martin McGuinness as Minister of Education.

Will Mr Martin McGuinness confirm that he is willing to take up Office? [Interruption]

Order. Let me make it quite clear that if there is disorder in the Galleries they will be cleared. Any points of order that are necessary will be taken at the end of this procedure. It will not be interrupted.

I cannot sit through this obscenity. I am leaving.

TOP

The Initial Presiding Officer:

Order. Will Mr McGuinness confirm that he is willing to take up office?

Tá. Cinntím sin agus glacaim leis an ghealltanas. I affirm the Pledge of Office as set out in schedule 4 to the Northern Ireland Act 1998.

I declare that Mr Martin McGuinness is now Minister (Designate) of Education.

I call on Mr Trimble, as nominating officer of the political party for which the formula laid down in Standing Orders gives the next highest figure, to select a ministerial portfolio and to nominate a person to hold it who is a member of the Ulster Unionist Party and of the Assembly.

I select the Department of the Environment, and I nominate Mr Sam Foster.

Will Mr Foster confirm that he is willing to take up office?

I accept the nomination under the Pledge of Office of schedule 4 to the Northern Ireland Act 1998.

May I ask you to repeat the words

"I affirm the Pledge of Office as set out ...".

TOP

<< Prev / Next >>