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 6 of 23.
“If Middletown was funded more adequately, we would get a return on it that would be equal to any funding that we provide because it does such terrific work, as others have said. <BR /> <BR />There is a disparity between what the motion calls for and what would be best for the continuing development of Middletown. Others have referred to the residential aspect. The original idea of Middletown, from memory, was that it would offer five-week residential courses for about 140 or 150 children per annum. That had drawbacks because of the disturbance involved with the children, for a start, and the fact that five weeks is not really long enough. The model that it has developed allows them to, in our case, look after up to 64 children, and it does that through schools, homes and the community in a mainstream way.”
“I am always glad to discuss Middletown in the House, even on the back of a poorly worded motion, such as this one. I will put Lord Morrow out of his misery straight away: funding for Middletown is 50:50 between the two Governments. On that basis, if you wanted to put it somewhere central it would probably be further south than it is now because it covers the whole of the Republic, as well as us, so Middletown is, I think, a very good location. <BR /> <BR />We have various problems with the motion. In fact, the only bit that we approve of is the last few words:”
“— wondering what is going on here. I plead with everybody involved to try to move this process forward as quickly as possible.”
“What we are doing here is passing the parcel; it seems to be about anything but making progress. The people who put us here must be —”
“as well as imposing an obligation to protect life. <BR /> <BR />What is the state? I am not a lawyer, but in this situation, to my mind, in European terms, the state must be the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Is it reasonable for the British Government to hide behind DUP intransigence? Or should they be bypassing the DUP and trying to do something about it off their own bat? That is what is needed here. <BR /> <BR />You might have thought that we were getting somewhere with the Stormont House Agreement, which set up the Oral History Archive, the Historical Investigations Unit, the Independent Commission on Information Retrieval, and the Implementation and Reconciliation Group, but a year later, Fresh Start watered it all down.”
“It is self-evident from the evidence in the army files, never mind in the other file, but there is plenty of evidence there. That is an inquest that could go ahead quite reasonably, and I am sure that there are others. <BR /> <BR />The Lord Chief Justice has weighed into this discussion in a very helpful way, and I am sure that he must be feeling quite disappointed at the turn of events and the fact that, frankly, the DUP is blocking the process once again. The motion refers to the European Convention on Human Rights, which states that, apart from establishing a right to human life and the state's obligations, it:”
“He listened, he talked, and he said that he could do nothing. Once again. He said it with a bit more grace than his predecessor, I will say that, but, frankly, it was a major disappointment; another setback to a group of families that has been waiting 45 years. <BR /> <BR />Some of the people whom I have dealt with since my involvement with Ballymurphy began are now dead, and the contemporaries of the people who were killed are of an age — they will not last much longer. They are entitled to their day in the sun, to justice and to the truth about what happened. For the life of me, in the case of Ballymurphy, I wonder — I have said it before — what on earth is there for the state to protect? In fact, there is nothing. What happened at Ballymurphy is self-evident.”
“What does that say to me? I try to keep an open mind on these things because there are always two sides, and sometimes what appears obvious is not what actually happened and vice versa. It says to me that the authorities and the army have something to hide. Why would you want to bury something for 85 years? <BR /> <BR />Other people have mentioned the Ballymurphy families, and it is well known that I have been supportive of them for quite a few years now. I pay tribute to Doug Beattie, who is the second member of the Ulster Unionist Party to go to see them. Danny Kinahan's visit lasted only 10 minutes, but Doug went for a whole session — and a particularly revealing session it was, too. <BR /> <BR />Not for the first time, we went to see the Secretary of State; actually, it was the first time with this Secretary of State.”
“As I went upstairs, I was shown a copy of 'The Irish News'. There is an article in it that says that the army file on McGurk's Bar will not now be released until 2056. For those of you who doubt your arithmetic, that is 85 years after the event took place — 85 years on. There will not be anybody left with any recollection of what happened.”
“Before I came in here today, I was approached in the Great Hall by a couple of men who I should have recognised but, to my shame, did not. They were two representatives of the McGurk's Bar families. There was an atrocity there in 1971. I imagine they are in the Public Gallery, and it is good to see them again. They gave me quite a detailed account of their position on the lack of progress on that particular incident. I said that I would read it and raise it here again.”
“— take them off our streets and let our communities get out from under their jackboot. I support the motion and amendment No 1.”
“That organisation could, perhaps, make inroads into this nonsense. It is a plague on our society; we do not need it. Every country in the world has criminality and criminal gangs, but we, for some reason, still call it "paramilitarism". That is disgraceful. These people are organised crime gangs, criminals, gangsters and thugs. It is time that we took decisive action to get rid of them from our society —”
“Sammy Douglas made the point that a lot of paramilitary members who had spent time in jail and come out have become contributors to society. That is great; that is what we need to encourage, whether or not they have been in jail. If the ones who have been in jail have learned their lesson, come out and become valued members of society, there is a message in what we are trying to do. We want to see more of them put in jail for the activities that they have inflicted on this community for many years and continue to do so. They thumb their nose at the law, and the police, under present restrictions, do not seem to be able to do very much about it. We should give the police the tools that they need to take decisive action. <BR /> <BR />Mr Attwood is absolutely right: we need to fund the NCA.”
“Thanks for that. <BR /> <BR />Pam Cameron said that the issue of paramilitarism had largely disappeared from our TV screens but acknowledged that that did not mean that it had gone away. Clearly, it has not. Again, I refer to T:BUC because she did. T:BUC is a non-event so far.”
“Mr Kelly started his speech by accusing us of tabling the motion as some kind of hand-wringing exercise because we did not get the justice Ministry. If he and his colleagues in the Executive had accepted any of our five-point plans as the price for taking the justice Ministry, we would have taken it. What is on the table here is one of the points on which we were demanding action. <BR /> <BR />Paul Frew made the point, which is often made, about who was in charge at the time of the Good Friday Agreement and the ceasefires — that is OK — but he also praised Charter NI as a benevolent organisation run by people who really mean very well. He listed the church people, community associations and so on. He did not mention the fact that it is headed by a known UDA member and there are other paramilitary or ex-paramilitary members on the board.”
“The notion that paramilitary criminals should have any role in turning around the communities that they have such a grip on is ridiculous. <BR /> <BR />The first amendment adds detail to our motion, and we have no dispute with it. It is welcome that the need for clear targets and timescales is emphasised and a confirmation that this is really about organised crime. <BR /> <BR />I want to move on to what people said. Apologies to those whom I do not mention. Doug Beattie started off his speech by referring to the fact that he was inclined to look at things through rose-tinted glasses. All that I can say is that, after two minutes, he took them off and told us the way it is. Without going into detail, I thought that his contribution was excellent.”
“<BR /> <BR />The notion of defence, famously repeated by Mr Dee Stitt about a band being part of the defence of north Down, when the organisation to which he allegedly and unashamedly belongs controls the illegal activities in the estates of that area and others, is utterly disingenuous and needs to be called out for the smokescreen that it is. So-called paramilitary leaders, brigadiers, officers commanding or whatever with no visible income except from nebulous community activism have grown fat and wealthy. They live lavishly. They have business and property interests, the financing of which has been derived from the very communities that they claim to protect. It really is time to stop pussyfooting around.”
“The organisations involved, whether loyalist or republican, inflicted more terrorism and human misery on their own communities in the guise of defence than the perceived enemy, who were doing the same thing, ever did. They leeched off their communities — they still do it — by criminal activities that have nothing to do with defence or paramilitarism, such as extortion, drug trafficking, protection rackets, human trafficking and prostitution — the list goes on and on. They continue to do so. I forget who mentioned the statistic that over 400 families in the last recorded timescale had had to leave their home and be rehoused as a consequence of paramilitary pressure.”
“It is a judgement call whether to get your photograph taken with a known paramilitary, even at the launch of a funding event. I think that the First Minister made a serious mistake there, but that is the way it is. We all have to make judgements on whom we deal with and whom we talk to. <BR /> <BR />It is important to spell out what we are dealing with here and the emphasis on the word "paramilitarism". The Sinn Féin amendment at least mentions "criminality and organised crime". Paramilitarism, if it ever had any validity, was founded on the need for defence, volunteer activity, some sort of pseudo-military structures, the use of force to further political aims and the defence of or ending of the union. There was never a need for this.”
“No, sorry. Maybe later. Let me move on. <BR /> <BR />The extent of engagement that is regarded as acceptable between us or community workers and paramilitaries, either ex- or current, is a matter of judgement.”
“Mr Kelly had a difficulty with the word "perceived". I have a difficulty too, but I am probably coming at it from a different direction. If known paramilitaries, who are named weekly in the Sunday press, do not challenge the accusation levelled against them, that goes beyond perception. They think that they are above the law. That is really what we are talking about here: being above the law. That part of the motion calling for a protocol is difficult.”
“That was extremely good quality. <BR /> <BR />I will try to move on. We think it is time for the decisive movement called for in both the motion and the amendment. The inadequacies of the action plan, which have been recognised by the British Government, as various people said, need to be addressed. The plan will not be funded until it is detailed. Very importantly, the last line of both the motion and the first amendment talks about:”
“I thank everybody who has contributed today. Alliance proposed the motion to highlight concerns over the delay in meaningful action since the Good Friday Agreement, the ceasefires and, more recently, the so-called action plan and Fresh Start Agreement. I think that it is accepted around the Chamber that things have been less than perfect, to put it very delicately. We refer in our motion to the "lacklustre" response of the Executive. The Minister took exception to that. I cannot think of a better word. It has been lacklustre. It is slow. Mrs Cameron referred to the achievements of T:BUC. T:BUC has moved at a snail's pace since it was supposedly brought into effect. We need a debate on T:BUC some time just to see where we are with it, because it has been a complete shambles.”
“That excludes 95% of all Northern Ireland businesses, which is the percentage with fewer than 10 employees. I appreciate that there have been set-up schemes and encouragement schemes such as Go For It, Horizon 2020 and all the rest of it. If the new economic strategy is to improve on the old one, a greater emphasis on the needs of the vast majority of companies in Northern Ireland, which are small and medium-sized enterprises, would be appreciated. We need to change the focus slightly to an emphasis on supporting smaller firms that show promise and give them every encouragement because it is the best sector that we have. We will support the motion.”
“Let us see what happens with that. There are planning difficulties; Mr Storey mentioned one. We in Lisburn council have just completed a planning application for a golf course and a luxury hotel. It is a £60 million investment into that area, and it has taken 14 years — 14 years — to get it through the planning process. It is not quite there yet because the Planning Appeals Commission may yet have something to say about it. <BR /> <BR />I hope that I do not sound too much like a Brexiteer, but bureaucracy and regulation also eat up time and resources. It is a problem that, to my mind, is far more onerous on small businesses than on bigger ones, which have the capacity to deal with European and UK regulations. Somebody said that Invest NI currently seems to have a focus on high-growth companies with more than 10 employees.”
“Indeed, as Mr Storey pointed out, some of our best businesses started off as one-man bands, including Almac, Norbrook, Wrightbus, which I am surprised that he did not mention, and FG Wilson. I cannot really mention Norbrook without a shudder because we turned down insurance business from it when it was a one-man band; I cannot believe it. McAleer and Rushe is another one. I will move on. <BR /> <BR />SMEs can grow in various ways, whether through finding a good product, securing good contracts or innovation. More often than not, they prosper as part of the supply chain for bigger companies. Therefore, the more major contracts that come out of Departments or elsewhere, the better for SMEs. There are Executive delays such as with water infrastructure, Desertcreat, the Maze, John Lewis and, looming now, the York Street interchange.”
“It was published by Arlene Foster as Enterprise Minister. It has a vision that effectively encourages private sector companies to compete in global markets. It is very export orientated, which, frankly, brings in Brexit again because the situation around exporting may or may not become more difficult in years to come. The strategy notes the key drivers of innovation; research and development; skills; growth; exports; and infrastructure. It also notes the key sectors: business services; financial services; creative industries; tourism; social economy; and rural economy. I cannot help but smile when it notes that reform of the common agricultural policy will generate further opportunities for the agri-food sector — oh dear, oh dear. All those sectors offer opportunities for SMEs to prosper, and many have done so.”
“As somebody who ran a small business for over 25 years, I am very pleased to contribute to the debate. I agree with Mervyn Storey and others straight away that the contribution of small businesses and the FSB in this country has been enormous and always will be, because Northern Ireland is an entrepreneurial place where people like to set up a business. That is why we have so many small businesses. <BR /> <BR />The motion refers to the economic strategy and the necessity for that strategy to support SMEs that want to grow. I do not know any that want to shrink, frankly, or stay the same size, but if they do, they will not last long, because growth is everything these days. The FSB reckons that 80% of its members are committed to growth, which is the way that it should be. <BR /> <BR />The current economic strategy dates from 2012.”
“I thank the Minister for her answers so far. She said that she hoped that the various initiatives that she has put in train would lead to less demand on the Courts Service, but less demand equals less requirement for courthouses. Is this not a review of a review? A perfectly good review was done under the previous Minister, which made firm recommendations and produced potential savings. While this review of a review goes on, how much will it cost the Courts Service?”
“Does the Minister agree with me that, in fact, the sanctions and the punishments are available through the existing law to deal with this kind of pollution incident much more seriously, but the courts very rarely impose a fine that to the rest of us would seem commensurate with the actual offence? The fines are piffling.”
“The Minister is aware, as she commented herself, that this is only the latest in a long string. We have had the Faughan, the Ravarnet, the Comber river, the Lagan — I forget some of the others — the Sixmilewater and the Three Mile Water just in recent times.”
“Hopefully, we are all heading in the same direction and are on the same journey. We want a normalisation of our prison regime, and, whether we do it on the basis of fixed timescales or ongoing deliberations, surely it is not beyond us to have this settled within 10 years or, as Mr Beattie said, nine years; I see it as 10 years. We will support the motion — absolutely. We will not vote against the Sinn Féin amendment, but we will have to see what way the House goes on it.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. It is a matter of opinion, is it not? I see a prisoner in Maghaberry as a prisoner in Maghaberry, and they should all be treated in the same way and have the same status. I do not find that a hard argument to defend. <BR /> <BR />The amendment seeks to get to the same solution without actually saying so and without timescales. Its wording is:”
“It did not commit itself to very much. In fact, it did not commit itself at all, except to set up a review. We could have looked for more than that from the panel, but there we are. <BR /> <BR />We have no difficulty with the amendment except that, perhaps, it does not go far enough. It refers to prisoners with diverse backgrounds who are subject to different court processes depending on the nature of their charges. Well, I am sorry for the proposer, but, as far as I am concerned, a criminal is a criminal. If he is in Maghaberry because he was sentenced to be there, the nature of the court does not really matter. This notion of political status and separation should be far behind us by now. We do not need that. <BR /> <BR />The rest of the motion —”
“How many current prisoners will still be there in 10 years' time, clinging on to some kind of separationist status? It is time to move on this, so I thank the Ulster Unionists for bringing the motion before us. <BR /> <BR />It also refers to an Executive action plan. Sometimes, I think that, frankly, that is a contradiction in terms. However, that is not to say that, perhaps, this review, if it eventually starts — it is already five months behind — may not produce some fruit and will not sit on a shelf gathering dust. It is too important for that. <BR /> <BR />The panel made various recommendations, not all to do with separation. In fact, the one that it made on separation was pretty bland and vague. It just said that it should:”
“Nobody in our society, except, perhaps, PSNI officers, has had to suffer the level of threat, intimidation, strain and stress on their everyday lives that prison staff have had to suffer. Maybe it is because I represent Lisburn and, perhaps, others would say the same thing, but we hear a lot from prison staff on these issues, including from some who have had to retire prematurely because of activities that have happened in the separated regimes in Maghaberry. So, I absolutely agree that we should make every effort to come up with an integrationist solution and to end the separation as soon as possible. <BR /> <BR />The motion refers to timescales of 2021 and 2026 to finish all separation. Who could argue with that? If we cannot solve this situation within 10 years, frankly, what are we doing here?”
“I will deal with the motion first. We like it and support it, but that is not to say that it is perfect. It refers to the flawed decisions taken in 2003, and I think that Mr Beattie referred to subsequent decisions by the previous Justice Minister. All that I will say about that is that decisions were taken by people who knew what they were talking about in the best interests of security and health and safety in the prison. If they turned out to be flawed, it does not mean to say that they were automatically flawed to start with. It is a really difficult area, and I suspect that the current Minister will have to deal with it as a difficult area as well. <BR /> <BR />Other Members referred to the situation with prison staff, and I join with them.”
“The fact remains, however, that reform means change. That has to be managed carefully and sensitively so that, at the end of the decade, the system is fixed by broadening primary care, ensuring that expertise is shared at single locations for entire local areas and making sure that we never again have a fifth of the population on a waiting list. I doubt that that could happen anywhere else in the world. <BR /> <BR />We have said from the outset that we are not here to oppose for the sake of doing so. The Minister will receive our support where she reforms in line with expert advice but absolutely not where she fails to do so. We will judge the Bengoa report on its merits, not on the Minister's view of it. We warmly commend the motion to the House.”
“We will wait and see what Professor Bengoa has to say, if that is ever revealed to us. <BR /> <BR />When nearly 400,000 people are on a waiting list, that means you have a systems failure. The system is broken. Just throwing resources at it will not make it less broken. In fact, by failing to recognise this is a systems failure, we are insulting the many people who do such a miraculous job on behalf of patients every day.”
“it needs to mean it happens at the very outset. We cannot just keep dumping thousands of people on to waiting lists and then rely on secondary care, often in the independent sector, to intervene long after the issue should have been dealt with. <BR /> <BR />Again, we cannot miss the point here that the expert panel chaired by Professor Bengoa presented its report to the Minister some months ago. Since that time, the concern is that she has been busy trying to fudge the outcome by focusing solely on the needs of some of those working in the service rather than those who use it. That is no way to start the process of real, meaningful reform on behalf of the public that, frankly, should have been started after Transforming Your Care and the Donaldson report.”
“To put that another way, there is a tendency to see solving waiting lists by allocating more resources to the people on them when, in fact, the fundamental problem is that too many people are put on waiting lists in the first place. The resources are needed so that primary care services limit the number of people who are referred at all by intervening early to identify and solve the problem. When we say:”
“<BR /> <BR />I am cautious about repeating the word "crisis" too often, because it serves to create the impression there is nothing right about our health service. Many thousands of people every year are superbly treated by the service and the people who work in it. Many of the outcomes are nothing short of miraculous, but that is not to say that that word is out of place here. Clearly, when a fifth of the entire population is on a waiting list, something is not working the way it should. <BR /> <BR />I asked the Health Minister — I think it was in January 2015 — about the extent of the waiting list. The figure at that time was just over 180,000. It is now double that and more at 392,000.”
“That means that not only does successful treatment becomes less likely because time is passing on a waiting list but there is additional strain that only makes their health worse. There is a tendency in the Chamber and elsewhere to talk grimly of figures but not of human lives, long-term plans delayed, big life events put off or the stress and strain of uncertainty. There is also a tendency to not talk even of people who found they were clear of cancer but whose mental health had deteriorated very badly while they were waiting to find out. I would certainly exempt Pat Sheehan and Kellie Armstrong from any criticism of just talking about figures: I thought they both spoke extremely bravely today.”
“I thank the proposer for bringing forward the motion. We welcome that it was done on a cross-party basis. We are, of course, fully supportive of the motion and the manner in which it is being presented. It demonstrates that the Executive can and must be challenged in a constructive manner to deliver on behalf of the people. I suggest that, perhaps within the next year on another Opposition day, we bring a similar motion to check on actions and progress. <BR /> <BR />Of course, the issue is not just a mechanical one about targets not being met, but sometimes, that is the way it seems to be approached when discussed. The issue is that human beings — close relatives, friends and carers — are being left with huge uncertainty about their well-being.”
“I hope that, as a result of this and of the stalking debate we had only two or three weeks ago, we will stop talking about it and actually take some action.”
“Somebody mentioned the difficulty of getting a definition. There are very good definitions already on the record within the Department.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Minister, Claire, has promised that she will bring forward legislation on coercive control and domestic abuse. I hope that she can do it inside the timescale and before next June, because she said that she would not bring any primary legislation through before then. When she brings it forward, it is only fair to point out that a considerable body of work has already been done by the Department. David Ford — I give him a plug — did a lot of work on this, so there is groundwork that she can build on.”
“It could be just the fear of publicity; they do not want to have their names brought out in court. They do not want to have to appear in court. It could be a fear of the process or disenchantment, frankly, with the process because it is so plainly letting victims down. It could be the residual culture that exists in this country, that there is an element of shame or guilt. A wife who is perhaps abused in this way may still cling to the belief that this happened to her because she was not a good wife. I am not going to try to use the phrase "deserved it", because that would be absolutely improper; but I think there is still in this country a wee bit of a feeling that a wife is secondary to the husband, and some husbands will take advantage of that.”
“and is very valid. In the rest of the UK, certainly in England and Wales, there has been an attempt to do this. The PPS has acknowledged that there is a problem. It has acted on various recommendations and has gone into a more thematic examination of the reasons why they do not make this recommendation, but it has not produced an increase in the number of cases brought to trial. <BR /> <BR />I have that many statistics that my head is spinning. However, there were 470 cases of rape in one year here. I think that Clare Bailey mentioned that only 77 actually produced a charge and only a very small number produced a conviction. <BR /> <BR />I wonder why, in this more enlightened age, women who have been violated in this way and parents, on behalf of their children who have been abused, do not report in greater numbers.”
“Frankly, I must ask what is going on in the Public Prosecution Service. If a woman is prepared to come forward — there are various reasons why women might not want to come forward — and take the very bold step of making this sort of complaint, I honestly believe that the success rate, at least of bringing cases to trial and making the charge, should be better than 17 out of 100. It is disgraceful. The amendment:”