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 18 of 23.
“However, that should not deflect us from making a real case for the need here. <BR />We have seen the benefits that a reduced VAT rate has reaped in the Republic of Ireland, and we need to emulate that in Northern Ireland if we can. Indeed, the Irish Government decision to retain their current rate of VAT has been made on the back of an estimate, which somebody else mentioned, that it has been responsible for 6,000 jobs. If that can be translated into anything of the order that Pubs of Ulster indicate, which I think is 3,300 jobs here, bring it on. We have to press for this. It would also significantly help us to achieve the tourism targets set out in the Programme for Government and the economic strategy.”
“My impression is that the difficulty that we might have with the Treasury on this is that, the closer you get to London, the less need there is for this reduction. It seems to me that London and the south-east of England will flourish as tourism destinations whatever the VAT rate is, but the further away you get — we are about as far away as you can get — the argument for the need for this concession is obviously well made. <BR /> <BR />Others said that this is not a decision that can be taken for Northern Ireland alone. If there was to be a reduction in VAT on hospitality matters in the UK, my understanding is that it would have to be at the expense of something else. You are allowed only so many reductions. The UK is using all its reductions and concessions. So, on what would we increase the VAT rate?”
“<BR /> <BR />Many from the sector have been calling for this change, not least, as others mentioned, Pubs of Ulster, which in recent years has been at the forefront of a campaign to deliver a reduced rate for the tourism sector. That is because of the obvious success it has seen from the effect of a similar measure in the Republic. As it stands, Northern Ireland is clearly at a disadvantage, because our rates remain high in comparison with those in the Republic, where the rate has been reduced in recent years and is to be held at a reduced rate, I believe, for the foreseeable future. That has not happened in isolation. It has been part of a trend across the EU, where no fewer than 13 member states have reduced their VAT rates in a bid to stimulate their tourism industries. <BR /> <BR />Obviously, this is not a devolved matter.”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak in the debate on the transformative effects of a reduced rate of VAT and what it could do for our tourism industry. I should say that I am standing in today for Judith Cochrane who has suffered a family bereavement. <BR /> <BR />Our tourism industry is one that we should be proud of, but it is also one that needs to be nurtured and promoted in any way possible. I believe that it is now time that the Executive begin to make serious representation to the UK Treasury to demonstrate the positive impact that a reduction in the VAT rate for the sector would have here. As an aside, I am sure the Minister must have thought she was getting away from tourism debates following her promotion, but here we are again.”
“I am glad to hear about the meeting tomorrow. I suppose that I should try to improve communication between myself and my council group. That is good news. <BR /> <BR />The Minister said that it is a non-strategic project. That surprises me, but I suppose that, in strictly legal terms, that is what it is. Would he not agree that a lot of strategic values are involved here with Blaris Road, the Maze, Sprucefield and connectivity to the M1, the A1 and the airport? It may not be strategic in strict terms, but it is a very important piece of work.”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. I note his confidence that the HIU will be set up and be operational by autumn 2016, but does he share my fear that the lack of agreement on other matters — in particular, welfare reform — presents a real risk to the interests of the victims, families and survivors who have placed their hopes in the Stormont House Agreement?”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. How will he ensure that the money will provide added value through increased outcomes for shared and integrated education rather than be used just to prop up under-pressure capital schemes?”
“I heard Mr Maginness's commendation of his Minister a few moments ago, but I must say that, on the ground, the impression is that the Minister's engagement with environmental NGOs in the run-in to the Budget was haphazard to say the least. Is the Minister satisfied that he fully engaged with those organisations before taking these budget decisions?”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. I take from that that there is no point in asking her about a timeline for any of those discussions. Vienna is well known as the gateway to Eastern Europe. Are there any discussions going on with places apart from Germany, such as Vienna or Brussels?”
“I really have very little to say about this group, as with the last group. Not being a Committee member, all I can say is that there certainly seems to have been considerable scrutiny and cross-party agreement between the Minister and the Committee Chair, which is always good to see. We have no issue whatsoever with any of the departmental amendments. The only one that catches my eye is amendment No 201, which Mr Elliott has just been speaking on. The idea of a report or review after three years is possibly one that could usefully be built into most legislation. In this case, however, you are replacing common-law legislation with something entirely new, and, therefore, there may well be scope for it to be tweaked or amended more seriously in future years. That said, we will support the whole lot.”
“As far as DOE planning experts are concerned, I think that if they look at a planning application on the potential flood paths from a reservoir and can be assured that it is safe, properly maintained and properly inspected, while you would not say that that made a case for building houses in those places, it does give them some comfort that there will not be a catastrophic flood. That is what the Bill is actually about. We will oppose the DUP amendments and support all the rest. I do not really have anything more to say on that.”
“Yes, the question of building at unsatisfactory locations, whether below a reservoir or, as has happened so much in England, on floodplains close to rivers and so on has been much discussed. In England at the moment, we are getting to the point at which houses cannot get insurance any more, or, if they do, they have a flood excess of about £50,000 because they have been built on a floodplain.”
“I have also heard cynical comments about the Bill being some sort of engineers' charter. Frankly, I have more confidence in the Institution of Civil Engineers than to make a suggestion like that. I presume that the comments apply to reservoir engineers as well. You have to take account of the views of experts; you cannot just say that they are generating some kind of —”
“<BR /> <BR />As far as the amendments are concerned, we have no issue whatever with the ministerial amendments, but we will not support the DUP amendments, amendment Nos 1, 2, 100, 101 and 102. We are not persuaded by the suggestion that reservoirs of between 10,000 cubic metres and 25,000 cubic metres are safe enough to be largely unregulated. I notice that the explanatory memorandum states:”
“Yes. I will try to rephrase what I said, although I think that it was fairly obvious that I was talking about public safety. The matter of who owns the dam is not of consequence. Public safety has to be the priority at all times. I have heard quite a bit of discussion about private ownership here, and I am sure that, if I were to delve more deeply into the nuts and bolts of it, I might have quite a bit of sympathy with private owners, particularly some who have inherited the situation and perhaps do not even want the reservoir. I heard a suggestion from somebody about draining small dams. I do not know what the Minister's view is on drainage, but, if emptying a dam in a controlled way is an option to take care of the problem, why not?”
“A huge number of amendments have been proposed by the Department, which is maybe surprising at this stage, but, when you look at them, you see that they involve changing "risk" to "reservoir", "risk" to "consequence" or "matters" to "issues" — I love that one. That takes care of so many of the amendments, although I am sure that they are all absolutely necessary and have been well discussed. <BR /> <BR />Again, we are talking about safety. I agree with other Members who said that "better safe than sorry" had to be the maxim here. It is a question of public interest and public safety. To me, it does not really matter who owns the reservoir or dam: if it is a question of safety, ownership does not come into it.”
“I can think of some reservoirs in my area, such as Stoneyford dam, which towers above the village of Stoneyford. Boomers dam, also in Lisburn, towers above the Pond Park area. Both areas have hundreds of houses. The Church dam in Hillsborough actually suffered a failure some years ago, and that caused a certain amount of damage. The situation was slightly helped by the fact that it is not a particularly big dam. <BR /> <BR />Until now, it seems that there has been a lack of a formal legal framework for reservoir management. That is now being tidied up by the Bill. We appear not to have been complying with our EU obligations to identify, assess and manage potential flood risks. <BR /> <BR />We support the Bill.”
“I rise with some trepidation, not being a member of the Committee and not having known until last week that I was even likely to have to speak on the Bill. Kieran McCarthy is unavoidably absent today, so you will have to put up with me. My remarks will be fairly general for that reason. <BR /> <BR />Clearly, the Bill has been well scrutinised by the Committee, and there appears to have been a lot of cooperation between the Committee, the Rivers Agency and the Department. We now have what we have. We are talking about safety in this group of amendments, and there is potentially enormous risk with a reservoir. It is clearly in the public interest that they are properly maintained and that the regime is properly regulated. There has been a lot of talk about flood paths and floodplains today.”
“Does the junior Minister agree with others within his party and perhaps without that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. We do not get free scones any more.”
“I respectfully suggest that the best thing that this Committee could do is to conduct a review of its own operations. It is a farce, and it really needs to be beefed up and tidied up. We continually do not reach consensus on virtually anything. I will leave it at that, but I will support the report.”
“Paragraph 60 of the report states that, on the initial ministerial provision in relation to the Department of Justice, there was no broad consensus. Paragraph 67 states that the Committee could not reach consensus on the size of the Assembly. Paragraph 82 states that the Committee concluded that there was no consensus at that time on d’Hondt. Paragraph 90 refers to the Committee's report on petitions of concern and states that the Committee did not achieve consensus for most of its conclusions. <BR /> <BR />Mr Speaker, I do not want to query the clock, but was my time perhaps added to that of the Member who spoke previously? I do not think that I have been going for four and a half minutes. If I have, my time is nearly up. That will be a relief to some people. <BR /> <BR />Finally, Mr Swann referred to paragraph 102. It states:”
“I suppose that we could say that we have fulfilled the obligation under the original Act to review the operation of Parts 3 and 4. We have done that, but, beyond that, there is not an awful lot to say about this. <BR /> <BR />The Chair, in his introduction, said that these reports provide a lot of valuable input for future deliberation, such as the Stormont House Agreement. I will go through some of the paragraphs in the report. Paragraph 31 notes the point that parties were asked to identify if there were any further provisions that they wanted to have included in the report. I think that that was the third time that they had been asked, and nobody ever came up with any suggestions. Paragraph 49 is on the operations of 16A and 16C of the Act. The Committee acknowledged that a consensus could not be reached.”
“The Chair laid out in his introduction why we were required to make this report. At the time, it seemed to come out of the blue and was a bit of a surprise. I would not say that we nearly overlooked it, but we did not have an awful lot of time to deal with the issue, not that that should be much of a handicap in the case of this Committee because, frankly, we never spend much time on anything. <BR /> <BR />I want to pay tribute to the staff, two of whom are here, Claire McCanny and Kate McCullough, and Jim Nulty. They have dealt with this as best they can, producing mountains of information for us. The Committee, once it got into its deliberations, met three times. I fancy that we may have spent between an hour and a half and two hours in total on this supposedly very important review, and here we are today.”
“In the spirit of North/South cooperation, perhaps, has there been any discussion at these meetings on the excellent work of Educate Together in the Republic and its relevance to the work of the Northern Ireland Council for Integrated Education (NICIE) and the Integrated Education Fund (IEF) in the Northern Ireland context?”
“I just want to confirm that the Minister you talk about has had extensive discussions with CCMS about this and it is not against the principle that we are trying to put forward here.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. He mentioned shared education. Would he not agree with me that shared teacher training is a way forward as well, and that St Mary's should be open to the suggestion to allow students from Stranmillis to apply for the certificate of education in cooperation with St Mary's instead of having to do it through a long-distance learning plan?”
“I thank Mr Rogers for giving way. Does he not agree that, if a student at Stranmillis would like to obtain the Catholic certificate — for want of a better term — the obvious way to do it would be by cooperation between St Mary's and Stranmillis?”
“On the contrary, it is about accommodating it fairly and equally. It is important that teachers are trained for working in a range of different settings. This means fair access to preparation for the Catholic maintained sector, but, in an increasingly diverse society, it particularly means catering for that growing diversity, including those of non-Christian faiths or no religious background in our school system. <BR /> <BR />We have a long way to go. The amendment puts us on the right road. The motion makes sure that we are heading in the right direction, but no one with a true interest in equality has anything to fear from that destination. We will support the motion and the amendment.”
“<BR /> <BR />In closing, I want to make it clear that the existence of a requirement for a teacher to possess a certificate in religious education to work in the maintained sector at primary level is a tradition that has served the sector very well for many years. Catholic education has a long and proud record of success in Northern Ireland. It has a religious basis grounded in the Catholic faith, and it is absolutely valid that teachers should be equipped to contribute to that ethos at the early years and primary level. The Alliance Party's preference is for a much broader based solution than a Catholic-based religious certificate. Our objective is for a single certificate, recognising diversity and pluralism, and it should be shared by any party advocating equality. This is not about refusing to accommodate a different ethos.”
“The lack of availability at Stranmillis affects everyone who trains there, regardless of background. There are Catholic students at Stranmillis, and they can leave without the certificate just as anybody else does. <BR /> <BR />Our amendment does not take away from the motion but complements it. Implementation of the amendment, which calls for collaboration in the teacher-training system, would be a powerful statement but would not and should not preclude moving on to the necessary legislative change to deliver on the original motion. This step would also amount to a powerful example of collaboration in the Northern Ireland teacher-training system.”
“The only option at Stranmillis is distance learning through the University of Glasgow, and many students leave Stranmillis with absolutely no knowledge of the certificate at all, even including the extra time and resources required for it. Some may argue that Stranmillis graduates have no interest in the certificate, but the principle is absolute, and it should be agreed by all parties. Every graduating teacher should have access to the full range of opportunities for which they are qualified. <BR /> <BR />Stranmillis has recognised the problem and is seeking an immediate practical solution that meets the requirements of that principle. MLAs from various parties have also recognised the problem and the potential solution of the use of St Mary's to teach the certificate as a distinct module that is open also to Stranmillis students.”
“I do not disagree with that. I thank the Member for his intervention. <BR /> <BR />As I said, teaching opportunities are becoming ever more restricted as schools close and pension arrangements encourage teachers to stay on as opposed to encouraging early retirement, as they once did. Restricted opportunities make equality of opportunity even more important and mean that there is an urgent need for intervention and change in policy and the law. If we are to maintain the certificate, there must, as a bare minimum, be absolute equality of access to it. <BR /> <BR />In general, the issue predominantly affects Stranmillis. It does not apply to Queen's, and training for the certificate is delivered in conjunction with the Church at the University of Ulster.”
“Any party taking itself seriously as a party of equality would and should recognise it. Teaching opportunities are becoming ever more restricted.”
“The issue is about how easy that is to achieve and whether it should be relevant at all. <BR /> <BR />Changing demographics and enrolments in the school system mean that almost 40% of job opportunities require the possession of the certificate. That seriously curtails opportunities for graduating teachers without the certificate, who actually constitute a majority. That would never be ideal, but we really need to hear from every party in the Assembly that it now agrees that that is intolerable in a competitive job market with fewer and fewer opportunities and openings. The principle is that any professional teacher, regardless of background, should be treated as equally capable of teaching in any type of school, including Catholic-maintained schools. That is an absolute requirement.”
“It will be interesting to see whether the two First Ministers can agree on this issue and take necessary action. I do not know whether one of them was supposed to be here to reply to the debate, but nobody is here at the moment. <BR /> <BR />Under the cover provided by the exemption to Northern Irish equality law, there is the ongoing requirement for a teacher to possess a certificate in religious education to work in nursery and primary schools in the Catholic-maintained sector. That is a requirement in place via CCMS, which has the power to modify or remove that restriction. That has been discussed with it on many occasions. We continue to welcome the step of giving a three-year window to teachers who have been made redundant and who wish to teach in the Catholic sector to acquire the certificate.”
“A school could still attempt to cite a genuine occupational requirement as justification for discrimination, which may or may not be accepted by the courts if it were challenged. That is why the amendment is necessary to achieve the desired objective, not just as a means of speeding things up. <BR /> <BR />There are a range of issues and problems relating to the teacher-training system in Northern Ireland, which have been discussed in detail over the last few months. There is little point in returning to them, other than to note that all four other Executive parties ganged up to stop the obviously necessary reforms from taking place. This debate is specifically about equality issues. It is for OFMDFM to initiate legislative change.”
“Even that is difficult, however, given the segregated nature of teacher training, with only St Mary's in practice offering the certificate automatically. <BR /> <BR />We will support the motion, and we certainly advocate our amendment. The difficulty with the motion is not its content, with which we agree fully, but the time that it would take. It would involve changing law, not just policy. That is why we have left it intact but added a rider that would provide a quicker route to addressing the issue partially and would not involve legislation. The amendment would put in place an interim solution that addresses the problems pending the passage of legislation, so they are complementary. <BR /> <BR />Even a legislative ban through the amendment of equality legislation may not be completely watertight.”
“For Mr Kinahan's benefit, "interim" means until the necessary action is implemented. That is what the motion says. It is not up to us to set a time limit; it is up to OFMDFM. <BR /> <BR />We welcome the debate. It is not only unionists who have long had a problem with this issue. In practice, the 1976 exemption enables Catholic schools to employ Catholics if they so choose. It is reaffirmed in article 71 of the Fair Employment and Treatment (Northern Ireland) Order 1998. The Alliance Party has long supported the removal of the exemption. It has been broadly agreed that the exemption could be lifted, with the requirement instead being the possession of a certificate in religious education. Theoretically, that is available to anyone.”
“The Minister must be aware that, across the education spectrum here and abroad, it is widely acknowledged that a second language is beneficial to a child's education, whether that second language is a modern language or Irish — we could argue about that. Does he think that he gave the subject sufficient priority when assessing what had to be cut and what had to continue?”
“Again, I thank the Minister for the statement. My question is really a repeat of the one that I asked on the previous statement. The statement notes the progress in delivering Tourism Ireland's performance goals for 2014, and it lists them in bullet points, but it does not actually say whether Tourism Ireland has met targets or make any comparison with previous years. Can the Minister comment?”
“However, it does not say whether it met any targets during that year or give any comparison with previous years. Will the Minister comment on that?”
“I thank the Minister for her statement. It notes:”
“Will he give us some idea of what format that process might take? Would the outcome of it have any effect on the DUP's decision as to whether it would bring forward the conscience clause Bill in its present proposed form?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. The amendment calls on the Assembly:”
“I thank the Member for his answer so far. Who can apply to have the facade lit up, and what will the process be for such an application in the future?”
“At the same time, we are going to have hundreds into thousands of young graduate teachers who cannot get a job. As I have said, I accept these regulations but with considerable reservation.”
“The eventual increase up to age 68 will hit the teacher who is now coming into the profession for the first time. At present, most teachers retire before the age of 60 because — I would not like to say that they are "burnt out" — you come to the end of your useful teaching life at some stage in your late 50s or early 60s. If that 23-year-old teacher, who is now coming into the profession, wants to retire early, he may well have made 40 years' contributions, but his pension will be reduced if he retires early, by 5% per annum for each year of early retirement. <BR /> <BR />Only a few years ago, we were encouraging teachers to leave the profession in their late 50s and making up their pension to what they would have got aged 60. Now, we are doing completely the reverse: we are effectively forcing teachers to work on until the age of 68.”
“As the Chair has said, we do not really have much option but to agree to this, and the Committee has done so. She also said that the Committee had some reservations, and, certainly in my case, that is an understatement. <BR /> <BR />Take the situation of a new teacher who is going to join the new scheme after 1 April. He may well graduate, and, if he is one of the 18% or so lucky enough to get a job, he will now take on an average contribution rate of 9·6%, and the employer will eventually pay 13·2% or something like that. The 9·6% contribution rate is well above the rate for a Civil Service or public service contribution, and the 13%-odd is well below it. As well as that, the eventual benefits for teachers are no better, and in some cases are worse, than those provided by other public service schemes.”
“I think that the Minister said that the Bill starts off with the 1986 Order, amends the 1996 Order and also gives some attention to the Special Educational Needs and Disability (Northern Ireland) Order 2005. I just wonder whether, at some point, given that we do not now write our legislation with quill pens — it is a lot more digital than that — we might rewrite the Order, rather than continually overlap and overlay new amendments. It would be so much easier for people to understand and follow. I do not imagine that it will happen on this occasion, but I will keep plugging at it because I think that, some day, we will have to come to that conclusion. For now, I leave it at that.”