Patsy McGlone
Mid Ulster · Social Democratic and Labour Party · Northern Ireland
“Limiting the power to dismiss charges involving the death of or serious physical harm to a vulnerable person will enhance the fairness and integrity of those criminal proceedings.”
“The SDLP welcomes the provisions for the long-overdue establishment of a statutory Commissioner for Victims and Witnesses of Crime. That is a significant step forward in the development of our justice system.”
“Putting the office on a statutory footing will ensure that the commissioner's role is legally recognised and accountable to the public and the justice system. The Minister outlined a number of the measures in the process of accountability.”
“OK. I thank my colleague — indeed, the Minister — for responding. It is, as the Minister said and my colleague highlighted, a sensitive area. People who are approached to give a reference should think long and hard about the implications of the references that they give: where they might wind up; the circumstances in which they give them;…”
“The SDLP welcomes the Victims and Witnesses of Crime Bill and the opportunity to debate it, alongside the Chairperson — or should I say, "Mr Amendment" — at its Second Stage.”
“I accept that the Minister's Department, as she has stated repeatedly, does not have the capacity or resources to develop those legislative provisions during this mandate.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,995 lines we hold for Patsy McGlone, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 34 of 40.
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee, having given the proposed policy due consideration, had no concerns about the proposals, but major concerns remain about the Department’s handling of the matter and the manner in which it engaged with the Committee. When officials briefed the Committee on 8 September, for example, they were questioned on the reasons why they were able to change position in spite of the prior legal advice received. Officials responded that the original legal advice was based on taking forward legislation for ACT only, whereas the current proposal is to deal with a class of projects, namely, non-wind. At no time did the Committee suggest or even consider the possibility of taking forward legislation for ACT only — at no time.”
“Yet, here we are, almost 12 weeks later, considering the statutory rule (SR) for the closure of the renewables obligation to non-wind technologies only. The two aspects of the legislation have been decoupled, as the Committee suggested to the Department on 30 June. As for the clarity and certainty promised on the aspects of the closure order relating to wind projects, the Committee is still waiting. <BR /> <BR />The Department brought the current proposals to the Committee on 8 September. The SR is for closure of the NI renewables obligation to all non-wind technologies, including anaerobic digestion, hydro, solar PV, biomass and advanced conversion technologies, otherwise known as ACT. ACT includes the proposed project at Full Circle/Bombardier.”
“At that stage, officials agreed that the Minister would write to the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change to outline his understanding of what had been agreed and to seek the appropriate assurances from the Secretary of State that his understanding of DECC’s position was accurate. The Committee agreed to convene a meeting as a matter of urgency as soon as the Department was in a position to provide full clarity on the specific issues of concern. I held the Committee in a position that we would convene with the urgency required as and when we got that clarity from the Department. That was on 9 July this year, just for clarity. <BR /> <BR />Given the urgency with which we were told that this had to progress, the Committee agreed to meet again as soon as the Department got back to it.”
“There was nothing in writing that provided the clarity and certainty that the Committee required.”
“I emphasise: nothing. <BR /> <BR />When questioned further, officials went on to state that those assurances had been received from DECC informally during conversations and may not be as clear to anyone who had not been party to them. However, bearing in mind the importance of the matter at hand, the Committee could not make a decision affecting the pockets of so many over such a long period merely on the basis of hearsay. That is not a way to bring forward legislation.”
“<BR /> <BR />Given this seemingly exceptionally positive development, the Committee asked to see the correspondence concerned so that members could assure themselves that this high level of clarity and certainty had indeed been provided. After some time, the correspondence was brought to the Committee meeting for consideration. There was nothing in that correspondence from DECC to DETI that could in any conceivable way add even a crumb of clarity or certainty, or provide any assurances to the Committee that electricity consumers would not be charged for the additional onshore wind put onto the system as a result of an extended grace period. There was nothing in the papers or in the briefing from officials that could in any way provide a sensible, sound basis for the Committee to make a decision on such an important matter.”
“<BR /> <BR />Officials told the Committee "with confidence and with certainty" that the cost to consumers would be significantly reduced from the figures provided the previous week. The Committee was told that the average increase in domestic bills could be as little as £3 a year and that the increase for high energy users could be almost 70% less than originally estimated. The Committee was put under considerable pressure to accept the SL1 and approve it without having been given access to the correspondence concerned, which, according to the Department, represented a fundamental change in DECC policy and provided a high level of clarity and certainty.”
“Thirdly, according to the Department, differentiating between different types of projects, as proposed by decoupling, may be challenged on the grounds that it could constitute unlawful state aid. <BR /> <BR />Officials went on to update the Committee confidently on a developing situation that they believed rendered the whole issue of decoupling academic, as there had been a fundamental change in DECC's position, which had been confirmed in writing only that morning. Although the renewables obligation would still close to onshore wind in 2016, projects that were already in the system would be allowed to connect until March 2018, effectively providing a two-year grace period for projects already in the system, which the majority of onshore wind projects in the pipeline would be able to meet.”
“Officials informed the Committee that the Department had given very extensive consideration to the issue since the previous Committee meeting and had taken legal advice on the matter. The Department put forward three reasons as to why the legislation could not be decoupled. First, the Department said that decoupling would give rise to uncertainty for other projects and that the time required would be well beyond the critical period for the Full Circle/Bombardier project. Secondly, decoupling would give rise to uncertainty for other projects, causing some to fall with a loss of future investment, a loss of future generating capacity and a loss of substantial economic benefit.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Minister also informed me that the timelines for the Full Circle/Bombardier project were very strict for triggering funding. He stated that the cut-off date for a decision by funders to prevent the project falling was Thursday 9 July and that the Committee’s agreement of the SL1 would provide the necessary assurances that investors needed for the project to proceed. It was on this basis and with assurances from the Minister that full clarity would be provided on costs and benefits that I decided to seek the Committee's agreement to convene an additional meeting on 9 July. <BR /> <BR />At the meeting on 9 July, the Department reiterated its assertion that the two aspects of the legislation could not be decoupled.”
“Members asked officials whether it would help solve the immediate problem if the legislation was decoupled to allow the non-wind aspects of the legislation to pass and thus enable those projects that were time-critical to move on. <BR /> <BR />During a meeting with the Minister on the matter on 2 July, I repeated the Committee's suggestion that decoupling the two aspects of the legislation should enable the non-wind aspects of the closure order to pass through the Committee without undue delay. However, the Department seemed determined, for whatever reason, to retain the legislation as it was. During the meeting with the Minister, I was informed that a number of onshore wind projects were in the pipeline that required similar assurances and that solving one problem could result in the creation of another.”
“<BR /> <BR />Whilst the Committee has every sympathy with wind developers, many of whom have invested considerable sums of money into ongoing projects, the Committee believes that the needs of developers must be appropriately balanced with the cost to consumers of adopting the proposed policy. A Committee decision must be based on full and accurate information. <BR /> <BR />For this reason, the Committee explored with the Department the option of decoupling the wind and non-wind aspects of the legislation. This would have provided the certainty that Full Circle/Bombardier required and would have given the Committee sufficient time to adequately scrutinise the more contentious aspects of the legislation.”
“However, the Committee was not content to agree to legislation that added considerably to costs for consumers in the absence of any consideration by the Department of the potential benefits that the legislation would bring, especially when the sole reason for urgency was to provide certainty to a project that was entirely unrelated to the issues with which the Committee had major concerns. The Committee did everything in its power to assist the Department in providing the certainty that Full Circle/Bombardier needed but could not proceed with the legislation in the proposed format when there was so much uncertainty and so little clarity about other aspects of the order.”
“It was unclear if the Committee was being asked to support a policy that would result in consumers being asked to pay more for their electricity with no net long-term benefits merely to subsidise wind developers who might otherwise find themselves in difficulties. <BR /> <BR />The Department placed considerable emphasis on the urgency with which the Committee’s agreement to the legislation was required because one particular project being brought by Full Circle Power/Bombardier required certainty on the closure order to secure the required funding in time to commence its £100 million non-wind project to ensure the project's completion by the closure date. <BR /> <BR />No substantive concerns were raised by the Committee regarding the non-wind aspect of the closure order.”
“<BR /> <BR />In the original proposal brought to the Committee on 30 June, the Department planned to support onshore wind generation for an additional year over and above that proposed in the DECC policy so as to allow developers to complete projects that had already been planned. This could add up to £16 a year to an average domestic consumer electricity bill, with the top electricity-consuming companies in the North paying around an additional £30,000 per annum for their electricity. The Committee considered this policy proposal and concluded that, considering the additional costs that consumers would be expected to pay, there was not sufficient or detailed enough information on which to base a decision. No information was provided to the Committee on any long-term benefits to consumers of adopting the proposals for onshore wind.”
“This was considered by many to be a very unreasonable change in policy, as wind energy developers have already invested considerable amounts of money in ongoing projects, which the change in DECC policy could put in jeopardy. The Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change has stated that, should DETI decide to extend the grace period and provide support to wind developers for an additional year, she would expect any additional costs to be funded exclusively by Northern Ireland consumers. That, in turn, presented the Department here with a difficult dilemma: to support wind generation with an extended grace period at a cost to consumers or to follow the DECC policy and create difficulties for wind developers.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Mo bhuíochas leis an Aire as an ráiteas. I thank the Minister for introducing the legislation. <BR /> <BR />The Renewables Obligation Closure Order (Northern Ireland) 2015 being debated today is a markedly different piece of legislation to that initially proposed and first considered by the Committee back in June. The original closure order covered both wind and non-wind renewable energy. The order being debated today makes provision for the closure of the NIRO to non-wind sources only, as the Minister outlined. <BR /> <BR />Back in June, the Department informed the Committee that a change in policy at the Westminster Department of Energy and Climate Change has meant that the Northern Ireland renewables obligation will close in 2016, one year earlier than originally planned.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Mo bhuíochas leis an Aire as a ráiteas. I thank the Minister for his statement. In principle, this seems like a good idea, and the practice seems to show that it is beneficial. I note that you have a variety of consultees, Minister. What about victims and victim support groups in the voluntary and community sector? For confirmation, have they, too, bought into this concept?”
“I appreciate that and thank the Minister for her response. Will she give some indication — it will do later on in writing if she does not have it immediately — of the Executive's present level of financial commitment to the project?”
“I have tried to find the app for the English-Irish dictionary. Could the Minister perhaps provide some further detail on how to get it? That is by the way. In regard to securing European funding under the Creative Europe programme in partnership with four other organisations, an dtig leis an Aire cur in iúl dúinn cá mhéad airgead atá ar fáil, agus cá mhéad a chuirfear ar fáil, do na heagraíochtaí sin, agus an bhfuil tionscnaimh úra eile ar bun ag an Roinn le go bhfuigheadh siad tuilleadh airgid ón choiste sin? How much money has been drawn down and there other projects the Department has in mind for this funding?”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as an ráiteas a chuir sí os ár gcomhair inniu. Ba mhaith liom cúpla ceist a chur uirthi maidir leis an app don English–Irish dictionary, mar a chuirtear air. An bhfuil an app ar fáil, nó bhí mise ag iarraidh teacht air inné agus ní raibh mé ábalta é a aimsiú.”
“Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as an fhreagra sin. I thank the Minister for that response. What level of collaboration or cooperation has there been with the relevant Irish Government Department or agencies to facilitate that drawdown? DETI had been working on that level of cooperation to facilitate a good working relationship and, more importantly, maximise the drawdown of funding from this very important EU programme.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I, too, am glad that the Minister is here to answer questions.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle, Mo bhuíochas leis an Aire as a fhreagraí go dtí seo. I thank the Minister for his answers up until now. In relation to the schools enhancement scheme, how many of the projects initially approved have, in fact, been completed or are nearing completion?”
“On that very point, I know that quite a bit of research has been done in the United States and Canada to show that childcare is longer term in the development of the child when it comes to reducing problematic issues in the education system and more widely in society. Childcare has been proved to be a societal investment, with good returns further down the line.”
“Essentially, we are asking for an equal footing to help stimulate our economy. We have seen the introduction of 30 hours —”
“I do not have enough time. The funded childcare allowance here should be increased to 30 hours a week on a par with what will become available in England. This change can then be used as a platform to work towards a universal childcare model and the effective implementation of a childcare strategy for Northern Ireland.”
“Barnardo's estimate that the average single parent working full-time on the minimum wage will face an annual loss of £1,200 when the Chancellor's changes are introduced in 2016, thereby placing further and increasing pressures on working families. <BR /> <BR />Given the legislative change by the Conservative Government as outlined above, we ask that we are treated equally here so that an inequality does not arise whereby access to childcare in work for families in England is much easier than access to childcare in work for families here. That is an integral part of it. We have spent a huge amount of time trying to reconcile the issues around welfare reform but we need to step it up a pace and change it to welfare and work reform, particularly for those working families who are fast becoming the working poor.”
“The Conservative Government in England have committed to passing legislation through the Childcare Bill to increase the entitlement to free preschool childcare for three-year-olds and four-year-olds to 30 hours a week. For this reason, the pre-existing inadequacies in childcare in Northern Ireland will be further highlighted by a changing UK context — indeed, it has exacerbated the disparities between the two — while the Northern Ireland Executive continue to consult on a childcare strategy. If no action is taken, a greater inequality will begin to emerge, as parents and employees in Northern Ireland face a reduction in in-work tax credits, which last year supported 89,000 working parents.”
“In England currently, each child is entitled to receive a maximum of 15 hours a week over no fewer than 38 weeks a year, up to a maximum of 570 hours a year.”
“Can we really afford to lose that mostly female and skilled workforce? I contend that we cannot. If parents here cannot return to full-time work or, indeed, cannot be incentivised to remove themselves from benefits to go into full-time work, because of the rising costs of childcare as outlined, the labour market in Northern Ireland will pay the price. <BR /> <BR />In Northern Ireland, funded preschool childcare is available in nursery schools, primary schools with nursery classes, some voluntary and private playgroup settings and day nurseries through the preschool education expansion programme. The programme is targeted at all children in the year immediately before they enter P1. Places are available for two and a half hours a day, five days a week, for at least 38 weeks a year.”
“When you speak, especially to young mothers, about the overall advancement of females in the workplace, the glass ceiling, as it is referred to, and the attempts to rectify it are talked about on numerous occasions. That glass ceiling, which inhibits the advancement of capable young mums in the workforce is fast becoming the "childcare ceiling". <BR /> <BR />There is a further consideration when debating childcare, and that is the effect that it has on our workforce. As well as inhibiting the advancement of young mums, because they have to remove themselves from the labour market, we are losing their skills. Many businesses in the North are concerned that they will not be able to recruit enough highly skilled workers to succeed in the future, according to the 2015 CBI/Pearson education and skills survey.”
“The mere act of having a baby reduces household income by turning a two-earner home into a one-earner home, and no childcare worker is employed because of the cost disincentive. In providing subsidised childcare, there is an economic multiplier effect: both parents continue working, and a third worker, in childcare, is added to the labour force. All of them pay taxes. Without childcare, two workers are turned into one, and both labour productivity and the tax base shrink by the same. <BR /> <BR />There are, of course, wider societal benefits, as noted by the European Commission:”
“<BR /> <BR />Of course, there are wider economic and social impacts at play when considering childcare. Let us look at what Sir Christopher Pissarides, the Nobel laureate economist at the London School of Economics, has said. Through the greater provision of good childcare, there is a direct impact on productivity and growth in the economy. In his exposition of childcare and cost, he found that the one job of child caring sustains two other jobs in the economy. Pissarides observes that, when working parents have children in countries with minimal daytime childcare provision, one partner frequently stops working because the cost of childcare is so high. His estimate is that the average cost is the equivalent of working 40 hours — too high a cost for working families.”
“The evidence suggests that income in Northern Ireland does not match current childcare costs. Families here face huge difficulties, first, sourcing appropriate preschool childcare and, secondly, paying for it whilst balancing the costs of daily life. It is difficult to incentivise parents to return to work when the financial pressures of childcare might push them into in-work poverty. Research carried out by OFMDFM further emphasises that point. A 2014 research survey found that more than half of our parents saw costs as the main barrier to using childcare. Many parents stated that the cost of childcare prevented them either from using registered childcare services at all or from using those services as much or as often as they would want.”
“In the context of an increase in population, overall employment levels in Northern Ireland have decreased; part-time working, the majority of which is carried out by female workers, has increased; and female employment rates/economic activity levels are significantly lower than in England. The list keeps going. The economic inactivity rate for those aged 16 to 64 in the North stands at 26·8%.”
“In fact, the 2014 childcare cost survey report found that average full-time formal childcare costs equate to 44% of the average salary. Over half — 55% — of respondents to that survey stated that childcare costs were over half of their or their partner's take-home pay. It also suggests that one fifth of parents use financial support to meet costs. That includes bank loans and credit cards, and 4% even use payday loans. <BR /> <BR />Those facts become more relevant when we consider the economic performance of Northern Ireland within the UK. PwC reported that, in 2015, economic growth would remain the lowest of all the 12 regions.”
“<BR /> <BR />Let us look at the biggest barrier for parents, especially mothers, who wish to return to work when their child reaches the age of three or four: cost. The cost of childcare for parents who want to return to work is a considerable burden, and I, like many others in the Chamber, have received representations from many constituents. I am sure that many in the Chamber have personal experiences of that. In Northern Ireland, the average full-time — 50 hours — private childcare place costs £162 a week; the average childminding place costs £157 a week; and a day nursery place averages at £155 a week for a child who is younger than two years of age and £154 for a child over two. Action needs to be taken to help working families, given that the average wage in Northern Ireland is not commensurate with the rising costs of childcare.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle, as an deis an rún seo a chur os comhair an Tionóil inniu. Thanks very much, Mr Deputy Speaker, for the opportunity to bring the motion to the House along with my SDLP colleagues. <BR /> <BR />The issue of childcare has been at the fore of our thinking for many months, and, as we will hear today, the situation is becoming worse for parents who want to work and contribute to our economy but simply cannot afford to return to work promptly and fully because of the rising cost of childcare. The SDLP has prepared a research policy paper on childcare. I will relay it to the House later today as we explore many of the statistics we uncovered while talking to stakeholders, parents, providers and academics about childcare, its impact and the current situation in the North.”
“OK. Maybe at that point, as there is a fair bit more to go, I will conclude.”
“Recent and ongoing events relating to electricity policy have demonstrated the need for a fundamental review of how electricity policy is developed and managed. It is essential that the potential for future economic development is not curtailed because of a failure to consider important economic factors in the development of electricity policy.”
“In relation to a recommendation on the contestability of grid connections, which could significantly decrease the costs to businesses for connections, the Department informed the Committee that it remains supportive of measures to implement contestability. What does that mean? What has the Department done to support businesses to achieve grid connections at less cost? <BR /> <BR />In response to a recommendation calling on the Department, as the lead body for electricity policy, to clearly state and communicate a long-term vision for electricity, the Department referred to its strategic energy framework. The strategic energy framework runs out in just five years' time. <BR /> <BR />More urgency needs to be given to the critical matter of electricity policy and how it impacts on businesses.”
“For example, where recommendations on pricing had implications for the single electricity market, the Department often referred to the ongoing work on electricity market reform, which it wished to see completed before further considering recommendations. That was last year. In the meantime, large energy users continue to pay, as they say, the highest electricity prices in Europe.”
“<BR /> <BR />In creating an infrastructure strategy, DETI must revisit the recommendations in the Committee’s reviews on electricity pricing and grid connections. The Committee's electricity reviews have been commended in the business sector for providing a sound and comprehensive overview of the electricity market. It made key recommendations on pricing and grid connections that were based on the evidence that was gathered by the Committee. However, since those reviews, there has been very little activity by the Department to demonstrate how the Committee’s recommendations will be implemented. In fact, it is still unclear which of the Committee’s recommendations the Department has accepted.”
“<BR /> <BR />The banking sector should be encouraged to become involved as a partner in economic development to achieve a step change in the relationship between banks and business and in access to finance for those businesses. We must also look at how we can reduce the burden of unnecessary bureaucracy on businesses. In the first instance, we must draw on the experiences of other EU member states to review the way in which EU legislation is interpreted. We need to provide legislation here that removes all unnecessary bureaucratic burdens on businesses. Other EU member states seem to have developed mechanisms and ways of interpreting those rules and regulations, which facilitate and help their local economies to grow.”
“The Departments should work in liaison with councils, which should be encouraged to work with Invest NI to develop local propositions and set targets at those local levels. Mechanisms should also be put in place at the earliest opportunity for the evaluation of the planned enterprise zone in Coleraine to consider whether and how the concept can be rolled out across the region. Similar mechanisms should be established to evaluate the planned agrifood competence centre, and consideration should be given to how that model can be adopted as a pilot to assess the viability of future competence centres in other priority sectors.”
“<BR /> <BR />In the report, a number of issues have been highlighted on creating an economy and employment strategy. DETI and DFP must have confidence that the available economic data on which decisions are based is robust, accurate, complete, timely and appropriate. That has not been the case in the past. The export plan and other strategic and local economic development plans must fully consider the relationship with our closest trading partners in the South to maximise cross-border opportunities. The advice and support provided to businesses at local level must also be reviewed, and plans should be put in place to improve and integrate the provision of advice and support in line with business needs. <BR /> <BR />Firm commitments must be made to subregional economic growth and job creation.”
“There is also a tendency to confuse activity with achievement. If the Executive are to succeed in achieving a vision for the economy, it is important that progress towards the achievement of that vision is effectively monitored and measured. For that reason, the Committee has recommended the establishment of appropriate working groups to develop strategies and to monitor their implementation. <BR /> <BR />The development of a vision and strategy must include a review of strategically important structures, policies and processes, and we must ensure that we have strategies in place to achieve horizontal, vertical and geographical integration of high-priority policies and strategies. We must ensure that people can reap the benefits of economic growth and job creation right across the region.”
“I venture that the beginning of this week and the talks process no less emphasise that very point. <BR /> <BR />Included in the overarching strategy must be strategies for education and skills, economy and employment, and infrastructure. Those are the key areas that we have to get right to provide the right conditions for economic growth. Importantly, we must also include our responsibilities for society and communities. We may work in an economy, but we must not lose sight of the fact that we live in a society. <BR /> <BR />An adage that is often attributed to Lord Kelvin is this: "what gets measured gets managed". However, measuring is not something that Departments here are particularly good at. There is often a tendency to provide measures for the level of actions rather than to measure outcomes and benefits.”
“The Committee understands the difficulties that the development of partnership working can potentially involve, especially in the early stages of development, but if we accept that everybody involved has an interest in growing the economy and creating long-term, sustainable, skilled employment across the North, we can, with the right attitude and leadership, overcome those difficulties and develop a vision and strategy that says, "We’re all in this together to create a prosperous and successful region for everyone".”