Fra McCann
West Belfast · Sinn Féin · Northern Ireland
“I want to thank everyone for the help that they have given me over the years, which has made my time here a lot easier. I also thank Assembly Members for the friendship, help and assistance that they have given me, from right across the Assembly Floor. I would love to say that I will miss everybody here; I probably will at times.”
“Go raibh míle maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. <BR /> <BR />It was interesting to listen to Robbie, who has first-hand experience of what firefighters go through. To have someone like that speaking in the debate is invaluable.”
“The statistics tell us, as Members have said, that firefighters are four times more likely to develop cancer due to their regular exposure to pollutants in the work that they do on behalf of society. Further preventative measures are obviously needed, and that is what the Sinn Féin amendment addresses.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Assembly needs to send a message that that is not an acceptable way to treat front-line workers who put their lives on the line day and daily.”
“Better decontamination measures and modern, accessible facilities will improve the working lives of firefighters and help to reduce their risk of cancer and other illnesses. <BR /> <BR />I thank the DUP for bringing the motion to the Assembly, and, in conclusion, the Sinn Féin amendment strengthens what is a good motion.”
“I would have thought that such organisations, which play a vital role in local government, would have been able to tap into the consultation on the Bill, because it has been debated widely not only at Committee but in the Chamber.”
The complete record
Every one of 424 lines we hold for Fra McCann, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 9 of 9.
“Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I recommend the Bill as a progressive, if fairly minor, piece of legislation that gives new parents greater flexibility in organising their parental leave, if their employer agrees, and gives equal rights to adoptive parents. <BR /> <BR />As not all workers are aware of their rights to maternity and paternity support, I commend all the trades unions that are organised in involving their members in the process of implementing better working conditions in the workplace, as well as the many NGOs spearheading progressive campaigns on the issue.”
“Go raibh míle maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I understand that Belfast City Council recently passed a motion on implementing a living wage. Given that this is Living Wage Week, and given that we live in a low-pay economy, can the Minister assure us that he will take up the mantle of pushing for a living wage for low-paid workers?”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. Does she accept that the unacceptably high cost of posting items across the border presents an unwarranted and unwanted tax on cross-border economic development?”
“Rather than come off with the same tired, old thing, they need to look at the impact that welfare reform will have on communities. It would be better if they stood by and defended those most in need in society, especially within their own communities, rather than continually accusing this party, which has always had a position against welfare reform.”
“He said that the spend on FE awards has increased, and he believes that there is a lack of understanding of how grants are awarded. <BR /> <BR />By and large, there was general support for the motion. Like always — you get it time and time again, especially when the Minister comes to the Committee — whilst we may be fixated on what may exist, it would sometimes be better to look outside the box and see if we could do anything better to ensure that things are done more effectively or to communicate better with students about how they can tap into it. There may be a lot of processes in place, but people may be slipping through the whole thing. <BR /> <BR />I am not surprised at the DUP attitude. Every place you turn now, they bring in the question of welfare reform.”
“The Minister said that he welcomed the opportunity to speak. He believes that there is a misunderstanding about what he and his Department have done. He said that there is no appreciation of the steps that have been taken, and he said that considerable steps are being taken to communicate. He said that he will look at that. He spoke of the demographic changes, schools hanging on to students, Access to Success, and finance for students being means-tested. He spoke of the breakdown of finance, and he spoke at length on the different funds available and explained what those funds were for. He said that hardship funds are a last resort. He also said that he had not reduced hardship funds and had, in fact, encouraged the take-up of funds.”
“Steven Agnew said that he had not heard anybody disagree that there had been an increase in hardship across society, and he asked why there had been a decrease in demand for this finance. He spoke of the need to advertise it. He also said that net funding for student support had gone up, and he spoke of the need to welcome that. He went on to say that if the student hardship fund is not successful, the Minister will need to look at it. He also said that the Minister should have good communication with NUS, and he welcomed the Minister's commitment —”
“He represents an area of high social deprivation, where people have not had life chances. He supported the motion. <BR /> <BR />Sammy Wilson never fails to surprise me in these debates. He said that he found it difficult to support the motion and that people were finding problems where none really existed. He said that people were jumping on the bandwagon and asked whether there really was a problem. He asked whether this really stopped people studying. He mentioned the NUS-USI study and said that any study depends on the questions that are asked. He talked about what is being done at present and praised the Minister for the way he has handled the issue. He said that people do not know where money comes from.”
“He also said that we could not have any motion without welfare reform being brought into it. <BR /> <BR />Bronwyn McGahan mentioned a very important issue. She had spoken to a constituent who was not entitled to apply to the hardship fund, and that has had an impact on their studies. Again, she quoted NUS-USI as saying that 35% of students spoke of leaving courses and that we needed to focus on that issue. There are highly skilled people who need to reskill but cannot because of financial constraints. <BR /> <BR />Sammy Douglas said that he came from a background of lifelong learning and that nobody wants to lose the scheme. He said that the Minister stated that there had been an increase in funding. He spoke about jobs and said that we had the best record in recent years.”
“He mentioned the North West Regional College and spoke of the need for food banks and said that 70% of students rely on parental help. He said that financial support is not always in place but parental support plays a major part. He asked whether the support is getting through to the most vulnerable. <BR /> <BR />Chris Lyttle supported the motion and the principle that students should get the help that allows them to participate in education. Most importantly, he said that the Minister guarantees parity of esteem and has made additional support available for students as well as demand-led funds for fairer access for students. <BR /> <BR />Alastair Ross doubted that anyone would object to the motion. He said that he would be surprised if students were not worried about finance.”
“The number of students from the most deprived areas has dropped by 3,000, and there is a need to make sure that the support mechanisms are in place to help students. Of over 7,000 applicants, 1,700 have been rejected. <BR /> <BR />Tom Buchanan said that funding was vital for students, especially those in need. Students' circumstances change over their time in college. He argued that the hardship fund gives protection but should not be seen as a long-term fix. He said that reliance on funding was more to do with wider societal issues. <BR /> <BR />Pat Ramsey of the SDLP recognised that the fund was in place to help students in financial difficulty. He quoted NUS-USI and said that a huge percentage of people were looking at abandoning courses because of financial concerns.”
“Go raibh míle maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Phil Flanagan said that he was aware that the Minister was frustrated about what people are saying about the hardship fund. He said that there were two main sources of support and that there was a growing rate of hardship among students. The fund is there to provide increased access in relation to achievement. NUS-USI said that it was deeply concerned about the cut in the hardship fund from 2009-2010 to 2014-15. Phil Flanagan was concerned that the growing rate of financial hardship meant that some students were in desperate need of support and may not be able to access the hardship fund. <BR /> <BR />Robin Swann, the Committee Chair, said that the Department should do whatever it could to help students, and he understands that the hardship fund does that but more needs to be done.”
“Go raibh míle maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Will the Minister monitor funding that is made for festivals, commemorations and bands and, if any display of sectarianism, racism etc is proven, take steps to ensure that all funding is reviewed?”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his answer. Can he advise the House whether he is approaching the forthcoming meeting with the National Union of Students - Union of Students in Ireland (NUS-USI) with an open mind to reconsider his decision to transfer money away from the hardship fund?”
“Thank you very much, a Phríomh-Leas Cheann Comhairle. I noticed that the Minister completely dodged the question that I asked. Does he not accept that the Committee is essential for its role in holding Ministers and officials to account?”
“On a point of order, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker. At no time did I say that the saving of £15 million was irrelevant.”
“No. <BR /> <BR />The Chair had to suspend the meeting because order could not be obtained from the DUP. Members on the Committee have drawn their own conclusions about why they behaved in such a manner. I thought that the Chair was not only fair in his running of the inquiry but at pains to ensure that everyone, including members of the DUP on the Committee, were given a fair hearing during the proceedings. It was quite clear that they have a different agenda. The Committee wants nothing but the truth and wishes for transparency, something that I thought all Members of the Assembly would want.”
“Secondly, the Minister informed us that another group was in attendance at the meeting: Fusion21. In fact, that was a red herring, no doubt in the hope that people would be thrown off the trail of the fact that the meeting was with Turkington's and Turkington's alone. In fact, many people whom we spoke to outside the Assembly were completely baffled. In all the proceedings, the Committee's only interest was to get to the truth. The tactics used by the Minister's party at the Committee were at times shameful and at times disruptive, and they made accusations that the Chair and the Committee had a bias against the Minister. At one stage, the Chair, Alex Maskey, had to halt proceedings.”
“That was made all the more alarming when it was established that Turkington's had provided resources to the Minister's party, although the Minister was at pains to point out that Turkington's did not get any of the new contracts as a result of their meeting. That is irrelevant. The fact that the meeting took place, and an attempt was made to cover up the fact that a meeting took place with Turkington's, is the pressing matter. <BR /> <BR />In the Minister's evidence to the Committee, he invited us to believe that misleading the Committee was unintentional. Let us look at the facts. First, the Minister received briefings from officials prior to the meeting on 16 April, which made it clear whom he would be meeting. Did the Minister not understand or read the briefings provided?”
“The savings that the Minister spoke of were not due to any technological breakthrough in window technology; they were purely down to the withdrawal of redecoration grants from people who depended on them to deal with the aftermath of window installation, many of whom live in the most socially deprived communities across this state. <BR /> <BR />I also understand that, in the aftermath of the Minister's meeting with Turkington's on 16 April 2012, the Minister announced a review and a suspension of the installation of double glazing. It is also my understanding that several other glazing companies that had a different perspective on the issue had requested a meeting with the Minister, and those requests were refused.”
“This was a company that was known to the DUP. In fact, it was said at the inquiry that it provided material for one of its election campaigns. It was also a company that was airbrushed out of the official documentation, and an attempt was made to give the impression that it was somebody else. In its evidence to the Committee, Turkington's was very clear and precise on whom it was representing. <BR /> <BR />The Minister also made a big play about the savings made due to his actions. At the Committee, we have always said that any savings to the public purse must be welcomed, but let us look at those savings.”
“<BR /> <BR />I was also surprised that the BBC, which brought the subject to light through its 'Spotlight' programme, would then treat the Committee inquiry with such disregard. <BR /> <BR />The Minister, commenting in annex A of the addendum to the report, attempts to play down the significance of the meeting with Turkington's. He states that the Committee:”
“Go raibh míle maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I have to say, I must have been at a different meeting from Paula and Sammy. Amnesia seems to have settled in. <BR /> <BR />I rise in support of the Committee motion before the Assembly. Obviously, a lot has been said in the debate up to now. For me, the first stage of the inquiry was an eye-opener. Sitting through weeks of evidence left me particularly concerned that the Department for Social Development could hold the Committee in such low regard. That was clearly evidenced in the supply of documents and other materials to the inquiry. I would have thought that it would be in the Department's interest to ensure the smooth running of any Committee inquiry. I also believe that the Committee inquiry was significantly delayed by the actions of the Department.”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. Earlier, he spoke about the levels of housing that would be required over the next number of years. Usually, that means that more land is provided for private housing, but in areas like west Belfast, where there is a waiting list of 3,500, availability of land never keeps pace with the number of houses built, which is low. Will the Minister tell us whether he is considering the release of more land and looking at the Matthew stop line to ensure that land is available for building social houses for that community?”