A request to light up a civic building in the borough to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the United States Declaration of Independence has been dismissed as a Stormont Minister’s attempt to “fawn over an orange man in the White House”.
The request – by Communities Minister Gordon Lyons – was sent to ABC Council, asking that a “prominent” building be lit to mark the occasion on Independence Day, July 4.
But Alliance Councillor Peter Lavery threw a star-spangled spanner in the works when he accused Minister Lyons of getting his priorities wrong and saying he should focus on issues closer to home.
During the course of a debate at the governance committee, it was pointed out that the move to light up buildings was no longer ABC Council policy, with a decision to deny such requests taken in April 2024 due to the sheer volume.
That said, a decision on the request has been put back after a proposal by DUP Alderman Mark Baxter, who suggested it be discussed by party leaders and ultimately come back before full council.
It was by no means a heated debate, but the differing viewpoints saw it still forced to a vote.
In response to a question by Sinn Fein Councillor Keith Haughian, it was clarified that lighting requests were no longer accepted, unless the Lord Mayor had a nominated charity and wanted to have a reception and illuminate a building on that night. If that were the case, the request would go before party leaders for approval.
And with that explained, Councillor Haughian said: “I’m not fully understanding why this is in this committee, and why we’re being asked this question. I suppose maybe it’s to test the water and see if people are in agreement with it. It sounds to me like it does need to maybe go to party group leaders first.
“My concern about this is, if we start this again, we’re going to end up with a whole raft of requests and, quite frankly, I can think of a number of them that would be more relevant to this borough than the birthday of the United States of America.”
Alderman Baxter, meanwhile, said he recalled the decision on lighting buildings and the number of them which saw them “lit up every night, and nobody knew what they were lit up for”.
But he added: “Personally speaking, I don’t have a huge issue with this. I think it is something that should be probably recognised and celebrated actually, because of some of the links there are, even with business, with Almac and that as well, for the borough.”
Alliance Councillor Peter Lavery said he had been against the original decision on lighting requests and questioned why that should change because it came from a Stormont Minister over a charity.
He recalled: “My initial gut reaction was a bit of frustration, because I was upset at the change of policy at the time because I felt that a lot of charities would lose out in terms of publicity and recognition for their services in the borough.”
“The lighting up was a small thing, but it made an important difference to them,” added Councillor Lavery, who said he would be “uncomfortable treating this request from the DfC minister differently”.
“ I hear people saying it’s not a charity, but if we can’t even support charities in the borough by something like this, I don’t think we should be just going with what the DfC Minister would want so, for me, it would be a no, but happy to discuss with the group leaders but I don’t see this as a goer,” he informed committee.
Sinn Fein Councillor Catherine Nelson said under the previous decision taken by council she did not see “any scope” to consider the request unless it originated from the Lord Mayor.
Party colleague Councillor Kevin Savage added: “I’d be interested to know what our response was to previous requests and why, because it came in from a Minister, it’s being treated differently. We do have the policy in place and I’d be quite interested to know how other requests have been dealt with since then, in regards to them coming in, because they certainly haven’t come before us.”
The head of estates and assets management explained this was the first such Ministerial request received since the policy was taken up.
Alderman Baxter, however, felt that such requests should be looked at.
“When we’re talking about the charities, that came all the time,” he said. “This isn’t a charity, it’s a one-off event. It’s a very special occasion with huge historical importance. It’s not the same as the request that would come in on an annual basis from charities that we were lighting up the building in the same colour every month, every year and year on year. This will be a one-off. I think we should consider it and consider it properly.”
But Councillor Lavery was adamant that it should not be treated differently and slammed the Minister for his priorities.
“I don’t think we should be just ignoring the charities and elevating the requests from a Minister above all of them,” he said.
“All those charities did great work and they got good profile from that lighting and so it was disappointing when it stopped. I think we should just follow the policy that was in place.”
And he added: “Quite frankly, I’m surprised that the DfC Minister’s priority is to write letters to this borough about lighting up a building. The DfC Minister should be concentrating on putting more people in houses, building more houses, and all the rest of the issues regarding our social security system and everything like that.
“When we had pensioners in their homes, not able to heat their homes, not able to get food on their table over the tough winter and this is what his priority is, trying to fawn over an orange man in the White House? So it’s a no from me.”
Councillor Nelson agreed and said the fact that the “Minister of Communities is spending his time writing letters to our council for such requests, is as ridiculous as it sounds out loud, at a time where we have a crisis in our housing, so we won’t be supporting that proposal either because it sits outside policy”.
But Alderman Baxter pointed out: “There’s 350 million people living in America and what an insult it is to them that you think it’s all about one person, as Council Lavery said, which is quite ridiculous.”
“There wouldn’t be much point in councillors being here if you can’t revisit things and look at things again, obviously, re-evaluate any decision that’s made on an ongoing basis,” he stated.
Councillor Haughian warned against setting a precedent over Ministerial requests and opening them up to discussion.
“The message to our local charities is that, in special circumstances, we consider these things. We don’t consider you to be special circumstances,” he remarked.
Alderman Baxter’s vote to discuss further among party leaders, seconded by Councillor Kyle Moutray, was put to a vote and passed on an eight-to-six margin.
