Dolores Kelly
Upper Bann · Social Democratic and Labour Party · Northern Ireland
“The legislation is only as good as its enforcement. It will be enabled by the sentences that judges and others may hand down, by cultural shifts and by changes in behaviour because of the penalties in place as a consequence. <BR /> <BR />We need to do much more with cybercrime units. We need proper resources for them.”
“It also covers the background to the Good Friday Agreement and the creation of this Assembly, as well as subsequent political negotiations over the years. The major figures and events over the past 100 years have been reflected in a way that ensures that all political perspectives of the Assembly are reflected.”
“I thank the Member for his question. An update on the current COVID-19 health and safety measures was issued to all users of Parliament Buildings on 1 March 2022. The update set out the current arrangements for ensuring the continuing safety of everyone in the Building.”
“I thank the Member for his question. I am pleased to inform him that the review of the display of artefacts is at a very advanced stage. The Member may have seen the letter that the Speaker issued on behalf of the Assembly Commission earlier today.”
“<BR /> <BR />As a member of the Policing Board, I receive updates on a regular basis from the National Crime Agency (NCA), which has determined that between 16,000 and 23,000 children and young people are at risk from sexual offences and grooming online. Those are horrendous figures, and that must be a nightmare scenario for any family.”
“Thank you for your answer, Minister. You rightly outlined a lot of medical and therapeutic interventions, but many children are suffering post-traumatic stress-type symptoms or, indeed, social isolation as a consequence of COVID.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,097 lines we hold for Dolores Kelly, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 18 of 22.
“We feel that we have had a gun put to our head — metaphorically speaking, thankfully — with the threat of fines. The British Government should remove that threat. That is the first thing that they should do. <BR /> <BR />In their approach to the North of Ireland, this British Government are the most partisan that we have seen in 20 years. In fact, they have threatened to breach the Good Friday Agreement with their proposals on the Human Rights Act and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). We will not stand for that. We will take whatever action is necessary to fight against that, including redress to the courts if need be. I welcome the intervention of Charlie Flanagan, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade in the South, on that, as well as the Irish Government's robust stand and their challenge to the British Government.”
“I hope and pray that he makes a good recovery and that his family are supported. As someone whose family have suffered a recent illness, I know the stress that it causes and the effect that it has on the wider family circle. We certainly wish him a good and full recovery. Nonetheless, a few months back, Mr Robinson and, I believe, the Finance Minister were allowed by the deputy First Minister to go off and make a deal at Westminster. That is against the joint nature of the office, and the deputy First Minister could have referred the matter to the Attorney General had he chosen to do so, but he did not. He allowed the First Minister to go off and do his own deal. It was out of those meetings that, we strongly suspect, welfare reform was coupled with the block grant.”
“We have not come to our decisions lightly. It ought to be remembered that the SDLP, along with the Ulster Unionist Party and the Green Party, sought to amend the Bill. Over 30 amendments were tabled and rejected by the DUP and Sinn Féin. In fact, the DUP lodged a petition of concern against those amendments, so, rather than us going to Sinn Féin's position, we welcome Sinn Féin following us on welfare reform. I recall that, on the day, we warned Sinn Féin that the bedroom tax was, courtesy of its votes, in the Bill. We hear much today about how we risk losing the mitigation powers for the worst excesses of the bedroom tax, but that is not the case. Scotland has already mitigated the bedroom tax in its delivery of welfare reform. <BR /> <BR />My party colleagues and I wish the First Minister a speedy recovery.”
“It is those very people, who look after the most vulnerable in society, whom the Tories wish to attack further, if we are to believe their leaked manifesto and budgetary commitments, in which they talked about taxing disability living allowance.”
“<BR /> <BR />Whilst I was canvassing during the recent election, I was struck by the number of people who are at home all day, having had to give up not only their jobs but a large part of their life to care for others. As you all know, we have an increasingly ageing population. I met a number of people on the doorsteps who are caring for family members who have dementia or indeed have had a stroke and who are still on long waiting lists for adaptations and home improvements. There is little help from others; certainly not from the public sector because there is just not the money to provide that help. That is something that struck right at the heart of me, particularly as I came from a health and social care background.”
“Many people have attempted to set the context of the debate in a much broader range of positioning and recent agreements than is the case. I think that we have to remember that where we are today with austerity measures is not just because of the ideological position of the Tory party, which, as the deputy First Minister rightly said, has got no mandate here in the North, but because of the more recent crash in the banking regulation sector. We are asking the most vulnerable people in our society to pick up the bill. We ought to remember that in setting the context of the Welfare Reform Bill debate. We do not want to be complicit in the Tory party's morally unjustifiable attack on the most vulnerable and marginalised. There has to be a much broader debate about what type of society we wish to create and live in.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I paraphrase your comments and Mr Wilson's comments about all Executive Ministers having a more collaborative approach to community and voluntary sector funding and looking at the outcome of that so that we have a more holistic approach to supporting those projects that do sterling work in areas that are most in need.”
“I thank the Minister for her answer, congratulate her on her new posting and wish her every success in it. It is disappointing that all of the funding has been allocated for 2015-16. What, then, is in the fund for any transactions coming forward for infrastructure improvements?”
“Does the Member share my surprise at the judgement of the First Minister, who, as I understand it, has recently elevated the special adviser to his office?”
“Would the Member agree with me that there were more red herrings than fact in Mr McCausland's contribution ?”
“Will the Member not agree that the only way to restore accountability and to get faith from the public is for the Members who are named in the report to resign?”
“Indeed. I hear Members ask where Mr Wilson is today. Let us wait and see the commissioner's finding on his behaviour. I am sure that, in Westminster, he would not get away with the behaviour that he displayed during the Committee inquiry here. <BR /> <BR />I urge that Members follow through on the recommendations. This is a significant report and a huge piece of work by the Committee.”
“I regret to say that, while I can commend many members of the Committee for their conduct during the inquiry, it is nonetheless the case that certain DUP members are under investigation by the Commissioner for Standards for unparliamentary behaviour.”
“Mr Speaker, I hope that, in your role, you will liaise with others in the House on how we can take forward the recommendations in the report on the findings — the adverse findings in particular against the special adviser — and whether his Minister, his party colleague, has a role in determining whether to continue with the disciplinary investigation recommended by the Civil Service fact-finding investigation. Let us not forget that. <BR /> <BR />Not only were the public the losers in terms of good stewardship of the public purse but residents, particularly in east Belfast, suffered shoddy workmanship and the failure of good service delivery by their public representatives, who, after all, have put the party first yet again. <BR /> <BR />It has been a long and difficult inquiry.”
“That tells the public and the rest of us all that we need to know about how some Members believe that they uphold the principles of public office. I think that they are called the Nolan principles, and I do not mean Stephen Nolan. <BR /> <BR />As the Chairman said, this was an evidence-based inquiry. It was strewn with memory lapses by the former Minister and his special adviser about what actually happened. There are questions to be asked, too, of the Department about the timeliness with which it provided information to the Committee.”
“Public money was filtered away to Red Sky, who actually claimed, I believe, for putting windows into an apartment block that did not even exist. You could not make it up, and we are told by Members opposite that that was good stewardship and accountability. I do not think so. <BR /> <BR />Before I go much further, I have to put on record my gratitude to the Committee staff — Dr Kevin Pelan and his team — for the excellent way in which they assisted the Committee in its inquiry. My congratulations go, too, to the Chairman, Mr Alex Maskey, who chaired the meetings in very difficult circumstances. <BR /> <BR />The Member opposite made allegations about a lack of objectivity: if you want to see a lack of objectivity, look at the minority report.”
“<BR /> <BR />The public and we in the House owe a debt of gratitude to the BBC for the excellent investigative journalism that exposed for all to see how public money is withered away and dwindled away in the political interests of a particular political party.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. <BR /> <BR />I could not have put it any better myself. I was astonished to read in the media that Councillor Palmer, rather than being held up as a shining example of a good representative with the values that a representative should have, hold and display, is now being crucified by the DUP for standing up for what is right and proper. Despite the efforts of the Members opposite in their minority report and, no doubt, in their later contributions, the former Minister Alex Attwood and former Minister Margaret Ritchie MP came out of this as people who upheld what was right and good in terms of the investigation.”
“Sadly, few organisations or individuals come out of the report with any good light being shone on them with, I have to say, the honourable exception of Councillor Jenny Palmer. In a nutshell, the Committee believed Jenny Palmer's account of what happened in relation to her conversations with Mr Stephen Brimstone, who said, "Put the party first". It is with some regret that I note that Ms Bradley, in her contribution, has also put the party first, rather than the evidence. The House is supposed to look objectively and hold to account Ministers and Departments in relation to their stewardship of public funds, and the Committee's inquiry has found that there was political interference at the highest level by the former Minister Nelson McCausland and, indeed, his special adviser.”
“I thank the junior Minister for that information. Can she give us a flavour of where some of the gaps and weaknesses are in the gender equality strategy and where some of the key targets will be for the incoming strategy?”
“The provision of good, timely advice and information is of the utmost importance as we set out the consequences of the Bill passing through the House today.”
“I would like to reiterate some of the comments made by Ms Bradley, particularly on the importance of providing good and timely information to carers about how they might benefit from the provision of additional notification to the pensions department on a timely basis. I also confirm the comments of the Chairperson on how the passage and scrutiny of the Bill was managed throughout the Committee Stage. Officials came regularly and routinely to listen not only to the Committee's concerns but to those of the other stakeholders who provided assistance to the Committee on the very complex world of pensions. <BR /> <BR />As others have said, there are winners and losers but, overall, in this instance, there are more winners in this particular Bill.”
“What information did Sinn Féin seek about future claimants; what type of benefits did that include; and can the Minister share any information that he provided to that party with the other parties in the House?”
“This is on a slightly different point, but does the Member not agree that neither Sinn Féin nor the DUP has fulfilled the promises of the Good Friday Agreement, which many people voted for because it was a better way forward, and that a sectarian headcount suits both parties?”
“Like me, has the Member discovered on the doorstep that, by and large, people are concerned mostly about our public sector, health, education and good services? At least our party stood up and voted against the Budget that Sinn Féin endorsed in recent Assembly debates.”
“Does the Member agree that it is no wonder that the electorate is confused over Sinn Féin's stance of not taking its seats at Westminster, when it has taken its seats here and in the Dáil, even though, over the years, it said it would not do so. Is it not the case that the only time that Sinn Féin negotiates with the British is for an on-the-runs letter or a royal prerogative of mercy?”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I was not as aware as the Member of the lengthy list that he set out. It shows how many people have considered the vulnerability of Mr Worton in terms of his acquittal and the initial charging. That stands as testimony to how he, personally, feels so obliged and hurt by how he has been treated — or mistreated — by the judicial system and how he still maintains, despite all the assurances by repeated Secretaries of State, the Justice Minister and this House, that he should be regarded as innocent. He very clearly feels that he has not yet been vindicated or his name fully cleared. Recognition should be given to the length of time that he served on remand. The SDLP supports the motion.”
“Absolutely. I have represented people who were interned without trial and who now suffer respiratory problems because of the damp and dismal conditions that they suffered under and lived in. We have no qualms about supporting such a cause. We will not go into those days in total; I want to deal with the case of Colin Worton because I know that it is one to which the Justice Minister has, in fairness, given lengthy consideration in the past, as have Secretaries of State. <BR /> <BR />Perhaps, as the parties labour over how we deal with the past, this is an element, given the miscarriages of justice, that should be included in the talks on the Stormont House Agreement.”
“That is a point that Mr Worton, in my discussions with him, said that he wants to have noted. I ask the Minister to reflect on that. <BR /> <BR />Indeed, Mr McCartney is right about other people who have spent time on remand, given the miscarriages of justice littered across the past. That is why the SDLP sought not only the reform of the police but also that of the judicial system, so that people would have confidence in it. So what if it opens the floodgates? If people spent time on remand, away from their families, their names dragged through the mud, they are entitled to a form of compensation. Society should reflect on that, particularly in cases where the evidence against them was so poor and was —”
“The case of the UDR four was always very sensitive and prominent in terms of the many murders of the past. As others have said, we have previously debated the case of Colin Worton, who seems to have had a rather peculiar set of circumstances in which he found himself to be ineligible for compensation for the time that he spent on remand. The trial judge, and indeed at other appeals, and the people examining his evidence all agreed that he was a very vulnerable person. That should have been picked up. There were early warning signs during his questioning by the police that he was a vulnerable person, and indeed evidence was submitted by the psychologist to confirm that that was the case. Therefore, one has to ask why, under the European convention, he was not afforded a responsible adult to be with him during that period of questioning.”
“In speaking to today's motion, I am very mindful indeed of the family of Adrian Carroll, who, no doubt, still mourn his loss deeply. It is unfortunate that, as we talk about matters of the past, we often reopen the wounds for the families who are left behind. We have to be very mindful of that in any such debates. <BR /> <BR />It is also right to be mindful of the fact that many in the UDR lost their lives in circumstances in which they were going about their ordinary jobs elsewhere and were murdered in a very cowardly fashion. However, other members of the UDR took part in and were convicted of the murders of innocent civilians. I am sure that many Members agree with me that they were a disgrace to the uniform.”
“Minister, at the last Question Time you said that you had to intervene to put some integrity back into the process, so it has not been without blame, in a sense. Does the Minister acknowledge that the community and voluntary sector, in particular, has had a splendid role to play over the last number of years in providing training and employment opportunities, particularly for women, people with disabilities and older people? If some sectors have lost out in this round, will the Minister widen his net in any future call for funding to allow them to be better represented in any successful application of the criteria?”
“I welcome the increase in funding. Can the Minister provide any more detail in relation to how that might be split between acute service provision and community service provision?”
“I am grateful to my colleague Pat Ramsey for tabling the question for urgent oral answer. Given that one of the priorities is social inclusion and bringing people closer to the labour market, will the Minister give the House an assurance that women's groups, which do such tremendous work, will be a priority in the application process criteria?”
“Whilst there may be questions for the justice system to answer, the biggest questions should be directed at the provisional republican movement and its institutionalised, systematic cover-up of sexual abuse. <BR /> <BR />Minister, what assurance can you give to families, particularly those living along the border, where sex abusers were moved routinely over the last number of years, that you, the gardaí and the Justice Minister in the South are sharing and cooperating fully in relation to the movement of and sharing of intelligence about those abusers?”
“— but I want to draw your attention to the fact that, on Craigavon Borough Council, the Ulster Unionist Party and the DUP, some of whom are Members of the House, voted to allow the Fulton family to put a summer seat and a plaque in the garden at Seagoe Cemetery in Portadown, where some of the victims of 'Swinger' Fulton lie.”
“I am grateful to the Member for giving way. You know that the party never wants to engage in whataboutery —”
“I do not think that I have ever heard the words "timely and efficient" being used to describe the social investment fund, since £30 million has been underspent as it is. The junior Minister referred only to money that has been promised as opposed to having actually been spent. Can the junior Minister outline what evaluation and monitoring methods are deployed with regard to the social investment fund?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Fundamentally, we have to agree on what type of society we wish to create and whether we want to have a fair society that protects the most vulnerable and the marginalised. I do not often hear the Member criticise the amounts of money that are paid out to the farming community — many members of which, although they may well have low incomes, are asset rich but are still subsidised with public money — nor indeed the companies that get money from Invest NI grants. If the Member had tempered his remarks right across all those recipients of public-sector money, rather than attacking only those people who find themselves unable to work because of family circumstances or the lack of employment in areas where they live, I might actually have had more respect for what he has to say.”
“<BR /> <BR />I would hope that the Minister has adequate resources at his disposal when he brings forward and implements the regulations to ensure that people do not find themselves in unnecessary hardship or humiliation. As we said before, it is, after all, people whom we are talking about. I would hope that all the rights of persons are protected and that we will not find situations in which people are subjected to degrading treatment.”
“I know that the Minister is not responsible for all that and that he will require assistance from the Minister for Employment and Learning, for example, in looking for vocational training. When we set that against the backdrop of the cuts to the DEL budget, you can see why we are raising concerns about a number of these matters. <BR /> <BR />I hope that that deals with a number of our amendments. The only new clause that we have proposed is in amendment No 16. That new clause deals with the appeals mechanism and seeks to have appeal hearings for claimants within four weeks. Again, that is based on what we are hearing about the experience in England, where some people are having to wait months for their appeals to be heard.”
“We know that the mitigation currently, I believe, lasts for six years. We want to know what happens beyond that. <BR /> <BR />The Minister will be very well aware of the necessity to build adequate alternative housing. None of this stands in isolation. We need to hear the Minister's holistic plans not only for the introduction of welfare reform but for meeting people's needs. There is also some concern about the types of job interview and work experience that some will be asked for. I think that it is already the practice that people with some disabilities are being placed in DWP offices because they cannot get employers to provide suitable work-based experience.”
“I think that it is also recognised that, in Northern Ireland, we tend to have larger households and homes. I think that England, in terms of the square footage of a family home, is among the worst across Europe when it comes to the type of house or apartment that people are allowed to build. There has to be some local flexibilities and acceptance of local customs and practice. <BR /> <BR />Mr Speaker, it will come as no shock to you and many in the House that we are opposed to the bedroom tax. Mr Agnew tried to draw the Minister — I am sure that the Minister will reply — on his comments in the last debate about two alternative and reasonable offers. Our amendment refers to that, although Mr Brady and others were not that inclined to accept that as a concern and said that they had fully mitigated that.”
“I will be interested to hear how the Minister is going to ensure that all those points are taken care of: the regulations around the imposition of sanctions; the clarifications given; and good, upfront advice before the imposition of sanctions. <BR /> <BR />Mr Agnew, in his contribution, referred to timescales. There are also concerns around the timescales for hardship payments, the possibility of a big gap between the imposition of a sanction and an appeal, and what happens in the intervening period. There are concerns about whether a hardship payment will perhaps come three weeks too late for many people after their initial application. <BR /> <BR />Mr Agnew also referred to the concerns that were raised around the bedroom tax and the availability, as others mentioned, of suitable alternative accommodation here in Northern Ireland.”
“It is a matter of regret that, here and in GB, opportunities were not provided to the Human Rights Commission to ensure full compliance with best practice in international law. <BR /> <BR />There are concerns that, when a sanction is imposed, it is reasonable and proportionate and will not cause hardship to other family members. There is a necessity for anyone who is determining the nature of sanctions to ensure that the interests of the child are paramount. In other words, a sanction on a person in a household must not impact adversely on children. It is still a fact that, in the majority of households, men are regarded as the main earners. Therefore, under the auspices of universal credit, if most of the money is directed through men, and sanctions are imposed, how does that impact on the rights of women and children?”
“It is not only about assisting them in completing their forms, advocating on their behalf and navigating their way through the maze; it is about helping people to be real advocates, with no axe to grind other than a person's self-interest and personal interest. From our point of view, it will be interesting to hear the Minister's commitment to that. <BR /> <BR />The other issue that we are concerned about is sanctions, and people's understanding of their nature, extent and type. Good, clear information must be provided. I know that in recent days, Mr Speaker — I think that it was processed through your office — there has been advice from the Human Rights Commission in relation to aspects of the Welfare Reform Bill.”
“I do not believe that that would be their rationale for supporting the call for an independent service provision. Many people have difficulties in accepting the independent advice of an agency and its ability to scrutinise itself. That is sometimes borne out by stories that we hear from England in particular, where targets have been set by the Department for Work and Pensions and sanctions have been imposed. As you know, there are horrendous stories of people being driven to the point of suicide as a consequence of having to deal with the social security system and benefit entitlement. We want to put in as many safety nets as possible for people seeking the right to independent advice.”
“The Minister well knows the value of agencies such as CAB and Advice NI and the many small independent advice clinics that we use routinely and regularly to help our constituents to make an application or to assist them in their appeal. There are, of course, very good and able staff in the Social Security Agency who give advice on pensions and on all types of benefit entitlement, but I believe that there is a particular role for the independent voluntary sector to play in the provision of such advice. I ask the Minister to consider that carefully. He well knows the policy intent behind our amendments, so we are interested in hearing from him if he can expand on that. <BR /> <BR />Some in the Social Security Agency are concerned that, if this were in the Bill, it would give an almost blank chequebook to the community and voluntary sector.”
“Thank you for that, Mr Allister. That is certainly how I interpret it, because there was no caveat read out in relation to that. That is where some people are very confused about the matter. The fact is that the bedroom tax is in the Bill. Sinn Féin will have to explain to its constituents why it did not live up to its manifesto commitments and to the commitments that it gave at its ard-fheis only last year; if it was in 2013, I stand to be corrected. <BR /> <BR />I move on to address the group 1 amendments that we have proposed, many of which deal with the issue of independent advice. I know that the Minister has given a commitment.”
“Far be it from me not to listen to every word that comes from the mouth of the First Minister. I am afraid that I missed that particular point on that occasion. <BR /> <BR />The fact is that there is no signed Stormont Castle agreement; there is a Stormont House Agreement. Mickey Brady spent the last few minutes talking about parties being negative and scaremongering. Which party went on a Northern Ireland-wide roadshow of "Stop the Tory Cuts"? None other than Sinn Féin. Who scaremongered right across the North? Indeed, many of them still have "Stop the Tory Cuts" posters in their constituency office windows, whilst their four Executive Ministers energetically endorse and implement the Tory cuts agenda.”