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 19 of 22.
“Mr Speaker, I welcome your assessment of whether that was an intervention or a speech. <BR /> <BR />In the last debate, Mr Allister asked all the parties to commit to publishing the signed Stormont Castle agreement. We have yet to see it. For all I know, John O'Dowd was waving about his wife's shopping list on 'The View' the other week. I have yet to see the Stormont Castle agreement.”
“I will give way in just a second. There are just a couple of points that I do not want to forget. I am interested in hearing today from the Minister a commitment that affirmative approval from the Assembly will be required for the regulations, that he will ensure that there is a process for reviewing and monitoring the implications of the Welfare Reform Bill, and that he will ensure their compliance with the human rights legislation. I will give way to the Member.”
“Mr Brady seems to be a wee bit agitated today. Perhaps it is to cover his blushes somewhat, because he stated publicly, as did Martin McGuinness, that Sinn Féin would "deploy a petition of concern" against the bedroom tax. He can girn all he likes here, but the fact is that it is in the Bill. Sinn Féin did not sign the petition of concern against the bedroom tax, and as yet, we have not seen all the regulations and accompanying mitigation flexibilities, which the Executive have yet to agree, in support of the Welfare Reform Bill going through —”
“Could the Member assist me by pointing out where any consideration has been given by the Minister or others to people with disabilities who require additional accommodation in their home to meet their personal care needs or even to store the aids and equipment that they need?”
“It is right and proper that such regulations be put forward by the Minister, because it is very clear that many Members and many parties are still very immature and are not yet addressing the real issues that face our society, particularly that of building a shared and reconciled community.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is very clear to me and, I am sure, to many independent observers what the real issue is for the DUP. Its abuse of power in using a petition of concern should send alarm bells ringing among all who describe themselves as democrats. I hope that other Members will prevail in their support for the regulations, which they did at Committee and, I presume, at the Executive. <BR /> <BR />We all know what this is really about.”
“The Member has given the answer better than I could have: the issue is flags. In Craigavon, in my constituency, we saw electioneering in its worst form, when the DUP, in the dying embers of the council, ignored the advice of the Equality Commission and the council's legal advice in order to score points. <BR /> <BR />The very fact that the regulations are being promoted across all councils will seek to ensure that whatever community has the lead role through its representatives on a council, it cannot force issues down other people's throats, and people will start to talk about some of the real issues and put in place a proper economy strategy, for example. Quite bizarrely, we do not have such a strategy in Northern Ireland, nor do we have a childcare strategy worthy of any note.”
“Clouding the issues around some of the more emotive subjects seems to be the ambition of some parties, because a consequence of being diverted from the bread-and-butter issues is that people forget the poor representation that many of them suffer from. <BR /> <BR />As my colleagues said, the use, at this very late stage, of a petition of concern is extremely regrettable. It is also symptomatic of the fact that some parties have not got their head round their responsibility to build a shared society and build reconciliation across our communities. That was exemplified in the Stormont House Agreement, when good relations, a shared future, flags, parading and the past were kicked into the long grass by the establishment of commissions.”
“<BR /> <BR />Unfortunately, some parties here in the North seek, in the Assembly and in local government, to reduce all of our decisions to nothing more than a sectarian headcount because it seems to support their clamour for power. When people are worrying about whether flags are flown, they forget about the dire circumstances in which they find themselves: the type of home that they live in; the type of job available to them, such as those with zero-hours contracts, for example; and the waiting lists that they have to endure for their health-care or domiciliary care services. <BR /> <BR />It would be much more advantageous for society as a whole if people, and the politicians who represent them, were truly engaged in the type of debate that impacts on their daily lives.”
“I served on the Environment Committee almost two years ago, and I recall these regulations being discussed at that time. It was very clear that all members were very mindful of their responsibility, as more power was devolved to local government from each of the Departments, to put in place equality provisions to ensure that there would be no abuse of power at that level. There was a necessity, which was particularly advocated by my party, to put in place regulations, such as the ones that Minister Durkan has put forward today, to ensure that no community would be adversely impacted by any decision of the new councils.”
“It neither addresses nor even takes into account the new build planned for the Dromore area. It seems to me that a lot of the agencies are not working together in a collaborative way to plan for the future in any sense that is strategic. Of course, it is very clear from the number of applicants that the school enjoys the admiration and support of many parents, who want their child to go to the school. Mr Deputy Speaker, I lend our party's support to the campaign. It is my hope that the voices of representatives of the area, in particular, are heard by the Minister and that he intervenes. <BR /> <BR />Mr Deputy Speaker, I planned another meeting for this evening, as I had not expected the Adjournment debate to take place so late. My colleague and I are both attending: apologies.”
“They have to be commended for the efforts that they have made over the last number of years. I know that a petition was lodged in the Assembly only last month. <BR /> <BR />I understand the Minister's difficulties in relation to the budget but, nonetheless, commitments had been given, and, as Mrs Hale said, this does not appear to have been based upon good, sound financial sense.”
“I want to lend our party's support to the campaign for Dromore Central Primary School. Mrs Hale very passionately outlined and displayed some of the frustration that the parents and school staff have experienced over the last number of years. I can relate to some of that in my own constituency, where the sod was supposed to be cut on new school buildings in 2010. Some of it is done now and some does not have a hope of starting in the near future at all. I looked up some of the information available on the web in relation to the school. I have to say it is a very impressive school. The inspectorate talks about the community-building, the whole pastoral care and the extensive outreach work that is provided by what is described as a hard-working principal and her staff team.”
“<BR /> <BR />I ask again that Sinn Féin reflects that the report to be laid before the Assembly is nothing more than a league table and that our proposal on a stand-alone Committee would be much more robust, give much more oversight on the inequalities that are being experienced by many people as a consequence of welfare reform and indeed look as it is rolled out across the PIP, for example, where many people on the lower scale of disability living allowance will lose out. <BR /> <BR />I think that I have covered most of the Members' contributions. At this stage, I will finish my contribution.”
“<BR /> <BR />I note, in particular, the slight, if you like, that Ms Boyle directed towards me about whether my party trusted me to be robust enough on the Committee for Social Development. I am sure that the record will show that I am quite robust, as will, I am sure, her party colleague the Chair of the Committee, on matters that come before that Committee. As the Chair of the Committee will know, many of its members do not show the objectivity that would be demanded in most other Houses in the examination and scrutiny of policy, particularly those who are champions of particular policy interventions.”
“That is something that, I am sure, the Minister would look forward to doing if the Executive's Budget would allow it. A very real and tangible way of militating against the bedroom tax is to build appropriate housing accommodation for people and greater numbers of public or social housing overall. <BR /> <BR />The Committee has also challenged the Scottish Executive's provision of childcare. We all know the important role that affordable and accessible childcare has in getting people out to work and allowing women returners, in particular, to enter the employment market. The Scottish are moving the debate on, not just around mitigation of the impact of welfare reform, but tackling inequalities as a whole.”
“It is very clear that the Scottish Executive recognise that there are a number of inequalities that are a consequence of welfare reform per se. That Committee has already gathered substantial evidence on the differential impact of welfare reform on women. As many Members know, the vast majority of lone parents are women. They also have to suffer from and experience the gender pay gap and are still the majority of care providers. The Scottish Committee is not just looking at the impact of welfare reform, but is actually challenging itself, its own Ministers and other Departments on how they have a contribution to make in the mitigation of some of those impacts. For example, housing policy in Scotland has now committed, as a consequence of the impact and cost of the bedroom tax, to actually build much greater numbers of social housing.”
“I had, one might say, the misfortune of having to listen to him on the radio this morning, as I was on the other end of the telephone myself. Otherwise, I would have missed anything that he had to say about welfare reform, because I would have been in my party group meeting.”
“<BR /> <BR />So that Members know, the Scottish Government have set aside some £81 million for welfare mitigation measures. The Member Mr McNarry, who is not here at the moment, of course, was quite vociferous in his comments when he was on 'Nolan' early this morning talking about parity. In fact, the Scottish Parliament has already established mitigating measures in relation to the impact of welfare reform. It is doing what, in its view, is best for the Scottish people, so it is no different from what we are doing here. I think that it shows a more responsible attitude and is one of the benefits of devolution. It is unfortunate that Mr McNarry would not inform himself better before he goes on a rant on the radio about parity.”
“Indeed, we did not grant the power of veto at any time to any party at Stormont Castle, Stormont House or anywhere else that people would care to try to mischievously put on record. <BR /> <BR />The welfare reform Committee is not a new concept; it is currently working at the Scottish Parliament. So that Members are aware, the Scottish Parliament, to inform itself better, can find out about some of the reports that have already come before the Welfare Reform Committee of the Scottish Parliament. I ask the Minister to reflect on his party leader's contribution yesterday when he did not turn that down right away, although he tabled a petition of concern in relation to that. At Further Consideration Stage, he might give further thought to the outworkings of such a Committee.”
“In essence, as the Minister outlined, it is a league table that decides who and what is sanctioned and why and how much is to be applied. I hope that Mr Agnew keeps his eyes wide open when he is having any discussions with the Minister about the report to the Assembly on the impact of welfare reform. <BR /> <BR />On our amendment in relation to the welfare reform Committee to be established, it should have been no surprise to any party in the House that our party has advocated this over the past two years. Contrary to the claims today by some in the media and elsewhere, the SDLP tabled numerous amendments two years ago and more recently to the Welfare Reform Bill.”
“I hope that, as a consequence of the sharing of the data, we will see more streamlined systems in place and quicker decisions being made, particularly for individuals who fall under the Supporting People scheme. I hope that that is a real consequence of that amendment as well as, if you like, a new enthusiasm for the sharing of that information and an obligation to carry that out. <BR /> <BR />I note, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, that you said that, if amendment No 47 is accepted, amendment No 49 will fall, although I did hear the Minister's commitment to speaking further to Mr Agnew to strengthen, perhaps, the format of the welfare reform report and about some of the timescales. Nonetheless, I am somewhat surprised, although, given Sinn Féin's servitude today, it believes that the mitigating factor is the combination of it.”
“At the outset, I want to say that we are disappointed at the use of petitions of concern on these amendments. I do not think that there was any necessity for that. It will not disadvantage one side of the community over the other, and it is a very clear misuse of petitions of concern. As my colleague Mr Attwood outlined, we will not move amendment No 20, but we will support amendment No 34 from the Ulster Unionist Party. We welcome the Minister's acceptance of that amendment and the support from other parties, as indicated here this evening. <BR /> <BR />I believe that all parties that have made a contribution have recognised the importance of data sharing and the welfare policy, and, in particular, the Minister outlined the importance of and some of the rationale for that.”
“The Member talks about getting people jobs. Does he not recognise that the evidence over the last couple of years is that there are more zero-hour contracts, more temporary jobs on offer, more part-time jobs and a lessening of terms and conditions for staff, many of whom are highly skilled?”
“For the Member's benefit, my name is Dolores; Dolores Kelly. If the Member wishes to refer to me by name on some occasion, it would be most welcome. I go by either name. <BR /> <BR />That ends my contribution. We will listen carefully to what the Minister has said and what he will say. We will also listen to how Mr Agnew, who has a number of amendments tabled, explains his amendments.”
“I said at the outset that we would listen careful to the commitment that the Minister would give on regulations. <BR /> <BR />When I was being brought up, I was always told that "she" was the cat's mother. If it happens once or twice, you would not mind, but to constantly be referred to as "she" across the Benches is a different matter. <BR /> <BR />I ask Members to reflect on the statement —”
“One argument that we have heard is that it provides flexibility for an individual claimant's particular circumstances, and our amendment does not contradict that. We want to see claimants being given at least 15 days. In theory, as the Bill stands, a claimant could be penalised for not providing good reason immediately.”
“I move on to amendment No 16, in relation to sanctions being imposed for not taking up an offer of paid work and for failing to provide a good reason for doing so. The term, "good reason" is not defined in the legislation, and we in the SDLP feel very strongly that the regulations or guidance must be based on real-life situations and must take account of the wide range of reasons why a claimant may not take up paid work, such as caring responsibilities, sickness, mental ill-health and so the list continues. Our amendment seeks to give claimants at least 15 days to provide that good reason, and we will listen carefully to what the Minister has to say on that point. <BR /> <BR />As it stands, there is no specific time limit in universal credit regulations by which claimants can provide that good reason.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention, but there are still huge numbers of people who slip through all sorts of nets. We have seen the outworking of some of the benefit reforms in GB, and some people have taken their own life because they have nowhere to turn in trying to pay some of the fines. Eighteen months is a long time to do without money. I know that Mr Wilson is making the point that potentially some of those have other sources of income, otherwise they would be complying with the legislation. I take that point on board, but 18 months remains too long a time to do without money. At this stage, we are very minded to support Mr Agnew's amendment in relation to the sanction at 26 weeks.”
“I will not deny that there will be some who wilfully fail to comply. Mr Wilson may know of many vulnerable people. I am quite sure he does within his community, particularly many people now living with long-term mental ill health. Huge numbers of vulnerable people living in our communities have difficulties with everyday life skills and coping. As a consequence of some of the reductions across the health and social care sector and to the support mechanisms, people are finding it tough to work their way through the system.”
“<BR /> <BR />We all know that many of our jails are already full. There is a commitment by the Minister in GB to reduce the number of women in prison. I would like to think that, as a result of welfare reform, we are not introducing sanctions and going to end up with more and more vulnerable people having to suffer not only a financial loss but, potentially, imprisonment as a result of not being able to understand and work their way through the system. <BR /> <BR />I will turn to our own amendment, which is No 16. As the Bill —”
“Again, my remarks will be much briefer than before. My party tabled one amendment in group 3, which I will come to shortly. <BR /> <BR />We welcome the Minister's recognition that three years is too harsh a sanction. Nonetheless, we are disappointed that it is being reduced at this stage to only 18 months. We will listen closely to what Mr Agnew has to say and, at this stage, we are minded to support the 26-week sanction clause. We will see what the response is to that during the course of the day and wait to hear the Minister's rationale. <BR /> <BR />I will pick up on the Minister's earlier comments and his explanation about the removal of a caution. If I understand the Minister correctly, I am right to say that a caution will no longer have applied to it a financial penalty. That would be a welcome improvement to the legislation.”
“What we have today falls far short of that.”
“I thank the Member for letting me in. Does he agree with me about this commitment and statement? I quote directly from Mickey Brady, who said on 30 July 2013:”
“Amendment No 6 gives claimants a transition period of a year in which benefits for a young person that are supposed to be reduced because a young person has become too old are maintained at the current rate. This gives claimants better time for transition. Amendment No 7 is to have the housing cost element of universal credit continue for four weeks after the claimant starts employment. Again, that is to ease the transition period. People tend not to get a wage the moment they get a new job, and I am sure that some cognisance could be given to that. Some flexibilities could be made in the guidance or regulations around the imposition or withdrawal of entitlement. With that, I finish my contribution.”
“We do not want to have that sort of situation arising here, and we want to hear that good, solid advocacy services will be available to people who find themselves in the welfare system. <BR /> <BR />I will touch on some of Mr Agnew's amendments. We will also listen closely to what he has to say. In general, we welcome his amendments, which aim to provide the most protection possible for claimants, and that is what we hear is at the heart of his policy proposals in relation to these clauses. I understand that amendment No 5 seeks to maintain the current system that exists under tax credits in which the disabled child element of benefits equates to two thirds of the severely disabled child element.”
“Amendment No 48 has been tabled by the Ulster Unionist Party. Again, we will listen to what the Minister has to say about this amendment and the commitments given, but we do believe that there has to be strong, impartial and independent advice that puts the needs of the service user to the forefront. I was very encouraged by the humanity and compassion shown by the Minister, as he fully appreciates that, behind each of these measures, there are people, individuals and families who are suffering. I accept the good faith of the Minister in his commitment to putting people first and at the heart and centre of this legislation. However, there are stories emerging from GB, England in particular, that some Social Security Agency staff have been put under pressure by their Tory paymasters to take people off benefits.”
“As I said in my earlier contribution, it is all right to talk about people going back to work and getting good contracts, but, as we know, a lot of the jobs on offer are low paid, have short hours, have temporary contracts and very little in the way of protections or rights, and many of them have zero-hours contracts. Set that against the backdrop of what the Tories are doing, who the Tories' friends are and what motivates the Tories. The motivation of the Tories is to attack the public sector, the welfare state and, indeed, many might say, the health service, so I think that this is a stand that we should make to take the opportunity to speak out against the worst ravages of a Tory-led Government. <BR /> <BR />I move on to amendment No 50 and amendment No 48, which relate to independent advice.”
“I think that there should be an acknowledgement that some people find themselves in exceptional circumstances, and some of that means that they have bigger homes, but that is usually because of the adaptations that are required for physical mobility and personal care assistance. I am very worried on behalf of those individuals, who are some of the most vulnerable. Again, those people are saving the state, if you like, huge sums of money because they choose to care for their children at home. Not only have the Tories said that they might go to a £23,000 cap, there is a suggestion that it might go down to £18,000.”
“We are very concerned about this, and we know that, already, the benefit cap proposal is being capped at £26,000, but, only in the last few weeks, the Tories have said that their first action, if re-elected, would be to reduce that to £23,000, which would affect thousands of families in Northern Ireland. A £26,000 cap does not affect huge numbers; I understand that it affects about 600 families in Northern Ireland. People may be wondering who is getting £26,000. As Mr Allister said in his earlier contribution, that equates to a salary of about £33,000 before you would have that sort of take-home pay. <BR /> <BR />In my constituency, I have families who have four or more disabled children in the house, and they are providing care at home for their children.”
“I do not believe that I did suggest that. I have the Stormont House Agreement on the table before me and I read out the six lines within the agreement that deal with the Welfare Reform Bill. I do accept, and I did say, that there have been mitigating factors already agreed and flexibilities put into the Budget that will mitigate the bedroom tax. It is not abolished, and that is what we want to see from our party's perspective. We acknowledge that the agreement, as I understand it, is only for five years. We want to see it abolished forever. <BR /> <BR />I will move on to amendment No 42 and deal with the benefit cap.”
“I want to move on, as the Deputy Speaker indicated, but I will give way, of course.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. We have, today, again honoured our commitment that we gave over two years ago to the people to stand against the bedroom tax, and we are pleased that the Green Party has stood with us. It is also a matter of regret that the Alliance Party, which has proved to be worthy poodles of the DUP/Sinn Féin diktat, have not submitted any amendments or spoken in relation to this —”
“Well, I heard what the Member said. He will forgive me for not accepting what he said, because that particular Member was too busy fighting fires created by himself and his party right across the Department and has enmeshed the Committee in having to complete inquiry report after inquiry report into allegations against his behaviour as Minister.”
“I hear something from the Back Benches to my right. I am glad they have actually decided to say something and make a contribution to the debate.”
“A well-known phrase says, "Success has many fathers", and I note that many Members, particularly in the DUP, paid tribute to the previous Minister for his development and gaining of a number of mitigating factors and flexibilities. I think that it would be remiss of me not to pay tribute to my party colleagues, especially former Ministers Margaret Ritchie and Alex Attwood, who led the charge at DWP and secured those commitments and the ability to have the flexibilities.”
“So, the bedroom tax has a particular resonance for the public in Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />As Mr Wilson and others will know, many people are very concerned about that. People who own their home talk about downsizing when their family grows up and leaves the home, but for many, particularly as people are living longer and growing older, the support network of neighbours and friends is crucial. The health service and other public-sector services are arguably being saved a lot of money by the good neighbour support that we often find in our communities. <BR /> <BR />We know that the Stormont House Agreement brought forward commitments to mitigate the ravages of the bedroom tax, but we do not see anything about that here. Again, that is in the absence of final Executive approval for all the flexibilities and mitigating factors.”
“I believe that any volte-face, as Mr Wilson would say it, that there has been has been by none other than his good self. He voted against the Welfare Reform Bill in another place, yet he is its champion from the Back Benches here. I am sure that no Member needs spelt out to them Northern Ireland's particular needs and the difficulties that people in the communities that we serve have in finding alternative accommodation. First, it does not exist, and secondly, where it does exist, it is in areas where people do not feel safe to live. It is a sad reflection of the fact that we have not yet dealt with building reconciliation on this island and between our two communities, particularly here in Northern Ireland, that people cannot live where they wish because of the fear of intimidation and threat.”
“I heard what the Committee Chair said about some of the assurances that we have been given about how some of the mitigating factors will provide comfort and no one will lose out on housing benefit over the next five years. We are concerned, however, about what will happen beyond that. <BR /> <BR />Other devolved Assemblies, most notably the Scottish Parliament, have also abolished the bedroom tax clause. We know that it was a model that the Tories put forward to deal with the south-east of England, but it has had severe repercussions right across GB. We also note that the Labour Party has given a commitment that, if it wins the election in May, it will also abolish the bedroom tax.”
“Again, we will be keen to hear what the Minister has to say and what assurances we can get on this aspect of the Bill. <BR /> <BR />I turn my attention to our opposition to clause 69, which is known as the bedroom tax or underoccupancy rule. Mr Deputy Speaker, you will know that we have signalled our opposition and, indeed, signed a petition, as has Steven Agnew — the SDLP petition of concern. It is regrettable that Sinn Féin can no longer support the view of its deputy First Minister when he gave a commitment at Sinn Féin's ard-fheis in April 2013 that it would deploy a petition of concern in relation to this.”