Trevor Lunn
Lagan Valley · Independent · Northern Ireland
“I know what I am going to do: I am not quite sure what he is going to do. <BR /> <BR />In discussion at the Committee, we had submissions from the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools (CCMS) and the Catholic Schools' Trustee Service.”
“They are relaxed about this. I know that they have some concerns about the Catholic ethos of their schools, but I cannot believe that the admission of non-Catholic teachers into Catholic schools will change the ethos of those schools at all. There is more of an obligation on teachers coming in to accept that ethos and run with it.”
“All that I can say to that is that the women, mostly, and couples who go to an abortion clinic, advisory service, hospital or private hospital are also entitled to freedom of movement and freedom of action. They are entitled to that under the law that was brought in by the British Government.”
“. Not yet, anyway. We have had this Bill from Chris, two Bills from the Green Party, and I forget the others. It has been a good day and, as others have said — yes, Pat Catney, of course, my constituency colleague, as well — it indicates what the Assembly is capable of.”
“The other day, we talked about the Brook advisory clinic and all the shenanigans around it. Most people here are too young to remember that, but it was effectively the same issue. <BR /> <BR />We are where we are. I hope that the Bill will pass; I am sure that it will now, judging by the tenor of the House. It will be another step.”
“<BR /> <BR />Back in 2015, I decided to visit the Marie Stopes clinic. I wanted to find out exactly what it was about. That year, the police had been called to the front of the clinic 200 times.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,110 lines we hold for Trevor Lunn, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 12 of 23.
“I also thank the Minister for his constructive and cooperative approach to the Bill. He has referred to the changes that he agreed to. It is not always the situation between a Committee and a Minister, but there has been a good level of cooperation around this. I do not know if anyone else has, but I commend the departmental officials, some of whom are with us, who came to the Committee on several occasions and, likewise, adopted a constructive and helpful approach for which we were grateful. <BR /> <BR />We look forward, as a party, like others, to the regulations and the codes of conduct and so on, when they come forward. Sometimes, the devil is in the detail, but we are off to a good start with the Bill. Parents, teachers and children will welcome what we are doing today.”
“<BR /> <BR />I could also refer to the provisions around boards of governors' duties, appeals, the rights of the child, mediation, the reduction in bureaucracy, which I think the Minister mentioned, the portability of the personal learning plan, transferability — I could go on. I think that we have been following the right procedures in this place and have come up with good legislation. It will lay down a template for improving the service overall. Mrs Overend is right: we have all had complaints for years about the system, including the bureaucracy, the slowness and the general strain of trying to put a child through the process. The Bill, when it becomes an Act, will make a genuine contribution to improving the system. <BR /> <BR />I do not really need to say much more than that.”
“The Health Department was not too keen on it, but, following the passage of Mr Agnew's Bill, it readily agreed to the conditions that were laid down in that Bill. However, we felt that it was still necessary for us to put something into ours, and we were probably right about that. It removes any ambiguity about the obligations involved. <BR /> <BR />Clause 5 requires the authority to provide the services or treatment likely to be beneficial to the child should such be identified during the making of an assessment. That, equally, is to be welcomed. The reduction in time limits, the general streamlining of the assessment process and the statementing are also very helpful.”
“Like everybody else, I support the passage of the Bill through its Final Stage. It has taken a long time. Mr Rogers referred to 11 months, which is the period since we first looked at the Bill. Mrs Overend, rightly, mentioned nine years, which is the period from gestation to completion. When we started talking about the Bill, I did not need glasses: I do now. <BR /> <BR />I do not want to repeat what everyone else has said. Everybody has found a reason to welcome the Bill and, obviously, I do as well. I just want to refer briefly to a few provisions, for instance clause 4, which places a duty on the health and social services authorities to cooperate, identify, assess and provide services to children with special needs. When we first talked about that, it is fair to say there was some resistance from various quarters.”
“I know that the Minister does not disagree that there is a cost to running our divided society on its present basis, even though we may disagree on the amount of that cost. Will he give a commitment to following through on the implications of the report through shifting resources from separate provision to investment for better facilities for the whole community?”
“I, too, welcome the Minister and congratulate him on the conduct of his first Question Time.”
“I thank Mr Hazzard for giving way. Does he agree that, while those 500 jobs are welcome, they are not actually new jobs?”
“I will end where I started. This corporation tax cut is coming over the horizon at a galloping pace and, if we are not ready for it, we will be totally embarrassed. The companies that already are having to go outside of Northern Ireland looking for skilled labour will find themselves in an impossible position.”
“To go back to my main point, we would significantly increase investment in skills in order to better prepare for a lower rate of corporation tax.”
“The House might reasonably ask what Alliance suggests, rather than being totally negative. We would not be starting from here, but, if we were, we would include a commitment to publish the independent audit of the cost of division, which is part of the Stormont House Agreement. We would abolish the social investment fund, which needlessly duplicates what other Departments can do, and reinvest that money in a myriad of other services. We would immediately halt any plans to relocate the DARD headquarters to Ballykelly. We think that that is a nonsense. We asked the Executive to make a commitment to legal aid reform, and I am told that a commitment was included in an earlier draft of the Budget paper.”
“Under the Department of Education, there are 50,000 empty desks — the Minister will be familiar with this argument — and no meaningful approach that I can see to area-based planning, which might have some effect on that figure. A programme that has been much discussed today — replacing older teachers with new graduates — has merit, Minister, but I am sure that you can see the logic in not producing, year on year, an oversupply of new teachers. Perhaps you could persuade your ministerial colleague the Minister of Education to do something about that, given that he does not pay for it; you and the Department for Employment and Learning are paying for it. <BR /> <BR />I could comment on the provision for almost any Department, especially those controlled by DUP and Sinn Féin Ministers, but time does not permit.”
“That includes neighbourhood renewal, the employment service, the Pathway to Success strategy for NEETs, the economic inactivity strategy and the European social fund, which seeks to bypass the normal procedures for decision-making based on bids and the assessment of merit. The result has been stalemate, and 95% of a nominal £80 million budget remains unspent after five years. It is probably time for the Minister to consider winding up that scheme and reallocating the money to something useful. He would not be short of suggestions on how to use it, that is for sure. <BR /> <BR />I can talk about other Departments; I will not major on just the Department for Employment and Learning.”
“The Executive — rather, the two-party grouping that makes the decisions offers no challenge to the reform of inefficient public services such as health and education. There is no attempt to address the cost of division. What happened to the commitments in Together: Building a United Community, which was two and a half years ago; the Stormont House Agreement, which was over a year ago; and the Audit Commission report, through the Ulster University Economic Policy Centre, which is presumably gathering dust somewhere? <BR /> <BR />Instead, we have political pet projects like the social investment fund duplicating what is already being done, or should be already being done, by other Departments.”
“— and his commitment to allocating an additional £20 million. I hold him in high regard, just as he appears to hold me in high regard. <BR /> <BR />It is a fact that we have disinvested in higher education for a number of years. The £16 million cut from last year's budget compounds an existing structural gap relative to the rest of the UK of approximately £40 million, so we are playing catch-up. Frankly, Minister, the experts in this field — the university chancellors and so on who have been talking about this recently — are not talking about £20 million; they are talking about five times that, but I acknowledge the start that you are making. <BR /> <BR />The Budget prioritises health and education at the expense of the economy, which is supposed to be the priority in the Programme for Government.”
“I thank the Minister for his intervention. I should not have let him in because I could just have read my next sentence, which is that I want to welcome formally what the Finance Minister said today —”
“Just a moment. Those are the very companies that we are trying to encourage to come to Northern Ireland through the concession on corporation tax, and they will be looking for skilled labour. I will give way to the Minister.”
“The date for the devolution of corporation tax is set at 1 April 2018 and the rate is to be 12·5%. It remains to be seen how that will be financed, but is anyone listening to the explicit warnings, which others have referred to today, from our universities and further education colleges that, unless we produce graduates and output with the necessary skills, we will not be able to satisfy the demand for labour from the very companies that —”
“As on previous occasions, the DUP and Sinn Féin have frankly displayed a disregard for the democratic process and contempt for the views of their nominal partners in government; namely, the three or four smaller parties. The resultant document cobbled together by two parties is not in any way strategic. We recognise that 2016-17 is a transitional year and is to be followed by a four-year Budget that will hopefully be properly consulted on and will relate to the Programme for Government. However, that is not an excuse for financial proposals that entirely miss the opportunity to begin to reform the health service budget, take necessary actions on education, address the cost of a divided society and invest in the economy. <BR /> <BR />The Minister in his opening remarks mentioned corporation tax, as just about everybody else did.”
“I am standing in for Judith Cochrane, who is not well today. I am new to this, a bit like the Minister. <BR /> <BR />In opening, I will say that I hope that the Minister, if he is still in place this time next year, will come up with something a bit more meaningful, well consulted on and better put together than what is before us today. It is hardly a surprise that I can confirm that the Alliance Party will oppose the Budget today on the grounds of process and substance, which are the same reasons why our Ministers opposed it. The Budget was circulated to Ministers at about 9.00 pm on 16 December in preparation for an Executive meeting at 11.00 am on 17 December. People need to sleep. Consultation was non-existent.”
“I am absolutely astonished by the Minister's assertion that to replace 500 existing jobs with 500 replacement teachers equates to 500 new jobs. That is his arithmetic here. The number of teachers being trained seems to be a big issue today. Why does he not use the numbers determined by his own teacher demand model — the model that is used by his Department — and stop this nonsense of training far too many teachers?”
“In conclusion, the Alliance Party supports the Bill with its proposed amendments, as we believe that it affords greater transparency, public engagement and accountability to those availing themselves of the legal services of solicitors and barristers. We feel that the changes are long overdue and that they are robust and proportionate, offering value to the public. We have no problem supporting the amendments. I have a personal reservation only about amendment No 10.”
“I am not convinced, and I do not mind saying so, about the need for amendment No 10. That will probably get me into trouble, Mr Deputy Speaker.”
“As the Minister said, clause 4 allows him to ask for a review at any time and that the Legal Services Oversight Commissioner has to obtain one and publish it. I agree with Mr Maginness and Mr Cree, who spoke about this issue. It took 10 years to bring this law to the Floor of the House, so are we really going to review it after three years? That is not long enough to get a pattern or a real indication of how it is working. I do not know whether there is some mechanism by which that could be changed, as others have said, to five years or even to leave it to clause 4.”
“Mr Maginness referred to the recently passed Public Services Ombudsman Bill, which seeks to bring a similar light touch in the right circumstances without having a whole Star Chamber to assess what is happening in a very simple situation. <BR /> <BR />The final amendment that I wish to speak about — and everybody else has — is amendment No 10, to clause 50, which will introduce a review of the reforms within three years of the Bill passing. Like others, and the Minister, who gave a very lucid explanation of the situation, I do not see the need for amendment No 10, but it is there, and our representative on the Committee voted for it, so I do not have much option but to speak in support of it.”
“Having quantifiable information to hand will highlight potential recurring themes, which can be addressed, perhaps, through the training which is noted in the Bill. <BR /> <BR />I understand that amendment No 9, to clause 38, was much discussed through the progress of the Bill so far. This will offer a safeguard for legal practitioners by noting that an apology will not amount to an admission of negligence for the purpose of civil proceedings. I believe that this is vital, as without that amendment it could be argued that a culture of clients taking solicitors or barristers to court could arise. The Bill seeks to offer improved quality of service for clients, and this amendment ensures that it will remain proportionate and not to the detriment of the legal sector as a whole, particularly for smaller practices.”
“I believe that the Bill is now in good shape, which is reflected in there being very few amendments tabled. I do not feel it necessary to speak on each one; I will just focus on three or four that have been brought to my attention. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 1, to clause 2, is welcome as it ensures that professional bodies provide the newly-appointed Legal Services Oversight Commissioner with comprehensive information on complaints. This will strengthen the work that the commissioner can do and will create and increase faith in their powers of scrutiny. Amendment No 5, to clause 29, offers significant benefit; that is to say that solicitors must provide the Law Society with the number of complaints made.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Bill sets out a new framework for complaint handling mechanisms which, I understand, the legal sector has, by and large, accepted. This is primarily achieved through the creation of the Legal Services Oversight Commissioner, increased layperson participation in the complaints process, pecuniary redress and increased clarity on how one can go about complaining about service received. I am sure I am not the only Member in the Chamber who has encountered constituents seeking advice on potentially complaining about service received by a legal practitioner because, frankly, they have a lack of knowledge of how to go about it. <BR /> <BR />Given the significant length of time that has passed since the Bain report, I feel that the policy proposals have received more than sufficient scrutiny and attention.”
“You might get another rolling system. <BR /> <BR />The Alliance Party is committed to having a strong justice system that offers the best value to the public and that is transparent and accountable. The Bill, as amended, will go a long way to achieving that. As others have said, the Bill's origins stem from the various policy recommendations of the review group established by Sir George Bain in 2006, 10 years ago. I am sure that if the Minister had been in post 10 years ago it would not have taken that long, but I suppose it is important to get these things right. We are where we are, and it looks to me like a good Bill. It did not seem to take so long for similar proposals to be introduced in England and Scotland.”
“I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate on the Consideration Stage of the Legal Complaints and Regulation Bill, which will strengthen our legal sector's procedures and improve confidence amongst the public and the service to the public. I should say that, like everybody else who seems to be participating today, I am not involved with the Committee. That has never held me back in the past, so I will keep going. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the Minister to his latest post. I wish him well for the next number of weeks that he will occupy that post. We will see what happens beyond that.”
“I know the Minister has probably had enough questions about the Irish language requirement and cross-border arrangements, but, although the statement says that teachers from the North can now apply for teaching posts in the South, it does not say how successful they are. Is there any evidence or any figures to indicate that teachers are actually obtaining jobs in the Republic on the basis that they will try to qualify with the Irish language certificate in due course?”
“It is easier to understand, and I am all in favour of simplicity when it is available. <BR /> <BR />As you can probably tell, Mr Deputy Speaker, I have very little to say about the amendments, and I am perfectly happy to support all of them. It looks as though they will go through without a Division, which I welcome.”
“Mr Rogers referred to a coordinated approach, which is exactly what we have been looking for. As the Bill now stands, it will provide that. <BR /> <BR />As I said, there are some minor changes. I always like it when we get to the actual use of a word, whether it is "may", "will", "shall" or "must". There is a change from "shall" to "must" in some areas, which is much more definitive and meaningful. I welcome the inspection regime. The three-year cycle does not bother me at all; it is a good result. If Mr Agnew's amendment No 2 pleases the Health Minister, I will not argue with it. I thought that the Minister might have had a problem with it, but it appears that he does not. Amendment No 3 changes the wording from:”
“I certainly do not want to upset the obvious consensus that has emerged. We have agreement among the Minister, the humble Chair, as he called himself, the SDLP, the Ulster Unionists and, I fancy, the Green Party, so I will certainly not disagree. <BR /> <BR />The Minister referred to minor changes, but they are significant in their own way. They are changes to changes that have already been made. It has been a good process. Throughout the passage of the Bill, we were concerned about the level of cooperation and the onus or obligation on the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety to cooperate fully with the Department of Education. I believe that, between the Committee's original amendments and the small adjustments that the Minister has made now, it is more than a simple tidy-up; it is a good result.”
“We always seem to be talking about the words "may" and "shall", Minister. Why does the Minister think that the use of the word "shall" will exclude any other motivations? I do not understand that.”
“<BR /> <BR />Having said all that, Mr Deputy Speaker, I am very pleased to see the Bill coming forward. I hope that we can get it through by the end of the mandate, because it would be a tragedy if we did not. <BR /> <BR />Mr Weir mentioned the possibility of league tables and vexatious complaints and claims. I hope that we do not have to go there; that would be entirely counterproductive. The point here is to acknowledge the problem and to collate the extent of it, as that would help you to understand and to then deal with it in its many forms. <BR /> <BR />I look forward to the further progress of the Bill. I look forward to Committee Stage as we get into detailed discussion, and I hope that we can finalise it and that the Queen will sign it before the end of term.”
“Mr Rogers mentioned that 50% of LGBT pupils had had an experience of being bullied because of the way that they are. That is utterly disgraceful. That would come as a surprise, and it also points up the fact that there has never been a requirement, until now, to categorise and record those types of bullying separately. Frankly, I can never understand why, when it is such a problem. The scale of the problem is highlighted by the statistic that Mr Rogers gave. I wonder whether we need a more specific reference to homophobic bullying, but, again, we will talk that through at Consideration Stage. The British Psychological Society (BPS) would have something to say for the record about the effect of homophobic bullying on schoolchildren, just as it had something to say about the effect on adults. Maybe we will talk to it.”
“Here we go again with "may" and "shall" or "must" and "should". I cannot help thinking that it should at least say "shall". I notice that the explanatory memorandum says "must". We will clarify that at some stage. <BR /> <BR />Moving on to the various categories, I notice that Mr Hazzard, I think it was, mentioned sectarianism, which is not specifically mentioned. "Political opinion" and "religion or belief" are, but we have a particular problem here with sectarianism, so maybe it needs to be in as a separate item. <BR /> <BR />I imagine that "sexual orientation" at clause 3(3)(j) could be construed as including homophobic bullying in all its forms. Some of us, however, have had quite a long journey trying to highlight that problem.”
“Clause 3(3), further down the page, says:”
“That seems to be the duty that is on a principal at the moment. Do we take it that that duty is being transferred to the board of governors? I do not understand; maybe the Minister can clarify, when he sums up, what the reason for that is.”
“I presume that that is meant to point to deliberate exclusion or isolation, as Mr Rogers mentioned, but I wonder why it has to be in there separately. Why not just say "act or omission" in subsection (1)? I am just pointing up what I notice at first reading. <BR /> <BR />On page 2, clause 2(3) states:”
“That is another way of looking at it. While I am on the subject of America, I will say that all 50 states in the United States have anti-bullying legislation, which, you might think, is quite forward-looking. Most American states also specifically outlaw homophobic bullying, except for the southern states, where they do not allow any discussion of LGBT matters at all. There is the difference: leaders of the free world. <BR /> <BR />In subsection (2) of the definition, it says:”
“An act of bullying does not have to be repeated. A single act of bullying can be just as serious as a repeated one, so I query that definition, just slightly. I share Mrs Overend's concern about the fact that it refers to the use of an electronic communication but does not really tie down the extent. If two pupils have iPads and one effectively bullies the other within school hours and continues to do it after hours, it really is the same thing, if they are at the same school. We may have to pay a little more attention to that. <BR /> <BR />In other definitions of bullying, I notice that the word "aggressive" creeps in. It is not in this definition — maybe it does not need to be — but that is worth looking at. I notice that in one definition — I must say that it comes from America, so I would not pay it too much attention — it says:”
“It leads to worse than that, tragically. <BR /> <BR />I am glad that we are starting to address the problem in a more considered way than it has been addressed in the past. I am sure that, as parents or grandparents or even those of us who have a memory of our childhood, we know that it has always happened. However, these days, the ways and means of going about bullying, if you are so disposed, are much more diverse. With all the electronic means available — cyberbullying has been mentioned — it is far more complex and complicated than it ever was in the past. <BR /> <BR />I have a few comments to make about the wording of the Bill. That is not to say that we are going to table amendments; I just want to flag up one or two things. In the definition, for instance, there is reference to:”
“I join others in welcoming the Bill. It is overdue, and I am glad to see that the Minister is, hopefully, going to fit it into the schedule before the imminent end of this mandate on 29 March. <BR /> <BR />Bullying, as others have said, takes many forms. It can be quite open and overt. It can be insidious and hidden. It can go unnoticed and, sadly, unacknowledged. That has sometimes been a problem. While our principals and staff in schools do their very best, I am sure, there are times when bullying goes under the radar because they do not accept that it has actually happened. I agree with the Minister when he says that, sometimes, it is passed off as just kids being kids or banter; it goes way beyond that, a lot of the time. Mr Hazzard was right when he pointed out that it leads to examples of self-harm.”
“I am surprised that the Committee is surprised by that. Insurance companies operate on the basis of claims paid, and claims outstanding versus premiums received. If it works — and I certainly hope that it does — there will be a gradual effect on insurance premiums, but it is ridiculous to ask insurance companies to provide a guarantee just because we are tinkering with the law.”
“I am sorry, but I do not accept that comparison at all. If someone is not wearing a seat belt or is on a mobile phone, it is pretty obvious. It is not so obvious what age somebody is at that particular time of the day, and that is the problem. That goes for the relevant additional driver provision as well. I am not sure that the police are enthusiastic about this at all, although I recognise the good intent behind it.”
“I hear what the Minister says about the feedback, the review, and so on. Can he tell us what the reaction of the PSNI concerning enforcement has been to all of this during the review? I take his point about accident statistics and those killed and seriously injured: that is evident. How is this to be enforced? What is the police's view?”
“Thank you for giving way. Are you saying that the Education Committee and the Health Committee could, between them, produce a report of the qualityof what might be produced by the RQIA? How would we have the facility to do that?”
“Even leaving aside one or two deficiencies that were highlighted today, an awful lot of parents and children will be mighty glad to see the end of this process and what it produces for special needs children.”
“That is lovely — manna from heaven — great. <BR /> <BR />We do not have a problem with amendment No 12, which is about affirmative resolution. <BR /> <BR />As you can see, we do not have much of a problem with any of the Bill. It is shaping up nicely into good legislation that is long overdue. I see that the previous Committee Chair has joined us. In his day, he also had sleepless nights over this one. I am sure that he has come here to see a happy outcome. I have lost count of how many Chairs we have been through in those nine years. <BR /> <BR />We welcome the Bill. We are looking for a bit more clarification on one or two items. We are not quite at the final fence, but we are almost there.”