Mickey Brady
Newry and Armagh · Sinn Féin · Northern Ireland
“I thank the Minister for his answer. Given that the show identified issues of police integrity, will the Minister now publicly encourage former and current members of the PSNI/RUC to cooperate fully with the Police Ombudsman and the historical investigations unit?”
“No, I will not. I absolutely refute that. I went in with an open mind, as did my party members, associates and comrades, so they can dress it up whatever they want. We went in expecting to hear evidence and expecting to make a decision based on the clear and unequivocal evidence that was given.”
“He was aware of the time spent on the inquiry by the Committee and departmental officials and looked forward to dealing with other issues under his remit. I am glad to hear that. He lamented that the time had not been spent on other important issues. I think that the Committee did as well, but as I said previously, this had to be done.”
“<BR /> <BR />Following consideration of the Committee's draft report, the DUP members of the Committee agreed that it did not in any way reflect their views, and, that being so, a minority report was produced and included in the appendices to the Committee report.”
“Mr Brimstone suffered from selective memory losses all the time. One of the arguments put forward was, "Well, her vote wouldn't have affected the board anyhow, so why would we have said this and that to her?" Why bother ringing her in the first place if her vote did not affect it?”
“As somebody who was involved with his own election campaign, I did not give it much thought. However, from Mr Campbell's point of view, it is my understanding that you probably wanted the report published the week before.”
The complete record
Every one of 250 lines we hold for Mickey Brady, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 5.
“However, in the Committee Stage, the Committee will have to weigh up the pros and cons of the Bill in discussion with the Department and stakeholders. <BR /> <BR />The Committee has begun its engagement process on the Bill with the Department. However, pensions are complex, and the Bill is highly technical, and as such, it will require detailed consideration. The Committee will be taking its time to give the Bill the consideration that something of that importance warrants. We will be engaging with stakeholders to get a broader and better sense of the anticipated impacts of the Bill and will discuss those with the Department.”
“The Department has advised the Committee that the aim is not to save money but to change how it is dispensed. That means that it will be paid upfront rather than over a long period. <BR /> <BR />The Committee has been given only indicative sums, with a commitment to provide the actual values and details of instalments in subsequent regulations. However, I think that the Committee will be eager to know what those are sooner rather than later. <BR /> <BR />It would be unfair of me to not mention the winners of the proposed reforms. The self-employed will benefit, and the Committee welcomes that. They will get the full state pension as long as they have accrued the 35 qualifying years. Lower earners and carers will also benefit from the measures in the Bill.”
“It will happen between 2026 and 2028 instead of between 2034 and 2036. Again, people's ability to plan for retirement is the issue. <BR /> <BR />It is also clear that anyone who reaches the state pension age before 5 April 2016 will be excluded from the new rules with the possibility that some, although not many, will be better off under the new scheme. The Committee will discuss with the Department the options that are open to those people, including the purchase of extra years to maximise their state pension. <BR /> <BR />Part 5 of the Bill will introduce a new bereavement support payment to replace existing bereavement benefits. The rationale for that change is to simplify the current arrangements, which comprise three different payments.”
“<BR /> <BR />A person has a right to their spouse’s or civil partner’s pension based on the National Insurance contributions of that spouse or civil partner. The Bill intends to remove that right for a person who reaches state pension age under the new scheme. I am sure that the Committee will wish to consider the issue in more detail and to reflect on whether it agrees with the Department that the current provisions no longer reflect today’s society, given that most individuals will qualify for a full state pension on their own National Insurance record. <BR /> <BR />Part 3 of the Bill details the arrangements for accelerating the timetable for phasing in the increase to the state pension age. To be clear, the increase in state pension age to 67 will be phased in earlier than previously anticipated.”
“<BR /> <BR />Members will note that the Bill will increase the minimum qualifying period for receipt of a state pension to 10 years. The Committee will seek to better ascertain the potential impact of that in the North and the number people that it is likely to affect. However, it is likely that those who are close to retirement age will be the most seriously affected, as they will have less time to make alternative provision. <BR /> <BR />We need to ensure that there are transitional arrangements in place to address that issue and that an effective communication strategy is in place to ensure that the relevant groups are made aware of issues they might face and steps they might take to minimise any adverse impact.”
“<BR /> <BR />Contracting out also raises a concern that the Committee will further explore with the Department. People who are in private sector final-salary schemes that are contracted out will get more of a state pension but will pay more National Insurance — they will pay an increase of 1·4% — as will their employers. That is a swings-and-roundabouts scenario. The Bill will allow employers to recoup the loss of their rebated National Insurance contributions, which is currently 3·4%, by changing scheme rules or increasing member contributions. The Committee will clarify those powers with the Department to ensure that there is an equitable balance between employers and employees in sharing the burden of those associated negative impacts.”
“<BR /> <BR />It might be argued, as is the intention of the Bill, that uncertainty about state pension entitlement would encourage people to take decisions about private savings towards provision for retirement at an earlier stage in their lives. It is undoubtedly important that everyone takes responsibility and plans financially as best they can for their retirement. It may be the case that knowing that you will have less of a pension acts as an incentive to do so. However, to some Committee members, that sounded like, "Expect to work for longer and to get less for your contributions." <BR /> <BR />There is also concern about people in low-paid jobs who cannot save much for their retirement, with the possibility that, in the long run, the Bill will simply increase the number of pensioners in poverty.”
“I believe that the departmental briefing stated that any major changes to policy in the current fiscal environment will involve trade-offs; this is an example of such a trade-off. <BR /> <BR />Young people will also be long-term losers. The TUC calculated that losses increase over time. It has estimated that, the longer the period of service after 2016, the greater the shortfall against the current system. Even lower earners are likely to receive significantly less if they retire after 2037. A person aged 49 years on £26,000 a year, for example, would be £29 a week worse off, while people in their mid-30s would be £40 a week worse off.”
“The headline issue is that a single-tier pension will replace the current two-tier scheme that consists of the basic state pension and the second state pension. On the surface, this appears to be an attractive proposition. The Committee welcomes proposals that will reduce the complexity of pensions and provide people with certainty about their pension income on reaching state pension age. <BR /> <BR />As a result of these changes, there will be winners and losers, and others will fall somewhere in between. As the Minister mentioned, the Committee heard, for example, that the state pension will be £148·40, contingent on meeting the full qualifying criteria. That is more than the current rate, but the number of qualifying years for a full pension will increase from 30 to 35 years.”
“<BR /> <BR />As Minister Storey outlined, the Bill consists of seven Parts. He touched on each Part in some detail, and I do not intend to repeat what he said. Rather, I note that the detailed consideration of the Bill will take place in Committee over the coming weeks, and the Committee will report back to the Assembly in due course. Departmental officials gave a pre-introduction briefing on the Bill to the Committee just a couple of weeks ago, during which the Bill was described by officials as something of a mixed bag. That is an apt description, as it proposes changes to the state pension, private pensions and bereavement benefits. <BR /> <BR />I will comment on some but not all of the Parts to which the Minister referred. Part 1 raises some of the key issues.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I suppose that, at the outset, I should declare a vested interest in that my pension is not that far away, but we will move on. I thank the Minister for his remarks about the Bill. <BR /> <BR />The importance of pensions cannot be underplayed. Everybody hopes for a healthy retirement and a good and fair pension to ensure the security that they need to enjoy that time of life. The Westminster Bill reforming pensions came into operation in May 2014. The Committee received a briefing on that Bill in June 2013. The Department also briefed the Committee on the equality impact assessment for the Bill, which gave the Committee an opportunity for a question-and-answer session about the projected impacts of the Bill prior to its introduction.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Does the Education Service provide a good and value-for-money outreach service?”
“The Minister talked about the effectiveness of the report. Does he not think that an independent inquiry, with powers and teeth, that could compel witnesses to give evidence could ensure that the scourge is properly eliminated? The Minister talked at length about the timescale and all the rest, but surely an inquiry could be achieved within a reasonable timescale.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I will start with a positive note and welcome the Minister's statement about the paediatric unit at Daisy Hill. There has been an announcement about a unit. I take it that you know about it, Minister. Maybe it came as a surprise to you as well. <BR /> <BR />This is a serious and complex subject and, unfortunately, the debate has degenerated into the usual SDLP scoring of cheap political points. Unfortunately, the Minister's comments have degenerated in that way, too. It is a subject that we should all be looking to eliminate in our constituencies. As he usually does, Mr Givan did his impression of Mr Angry without really adding anything to the debate.”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. Does he agree that the provisions will extend an important opportunity to re-access the labour market to individuals trying to move on from a conviction? Go raibh maith agat.”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. The Minister will know that the HGV levy will have a very negative impact on the North/South economy, not least in my constituency of Newry and Armagh. Has the Minister sought to re-engage the British and Irish Governments to try to achieve an arrangement that reflects the situation on the island of Ireland? Go raibh maith agat.”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. What economic benefits can be expected from the transfer of corporation tax powers? Go raibh maith agat.”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. Just when you are talking about Committees: you said that this is bad law. You also said on several occasions that welfare reform was bad law. Your party is opposed to that, but it seems to be rolling over and accepting this.”
“Maybe we should do what we should do on other things and stand up, present a united front and speak up for the people whom we represent.”
“I thank the Member for her intervention. To that, I will say something that we have been saying about other things: it might help if we present a united front, stand up and face these people down. <BR /> <BR />According to Mr Eastwood, we just have to roll over and accept all of this. That has been the tenor of some of the debate. As has been mentioned, the British Secretary of State, Theresa Villiers, can, through an affirmative order, exclude roads from the levy. If you look at what the levy would actually create, you will see that it would have only a marginal impact on the Treasury, as any importers or exporters would still have to pay the costs when landing in Britain. So it would not make any real difference.”
“It has been mentioned that the costs that we pay are already higher. Our food and petrol prices are higher than elsewhere. <BR /> <BR />Mr Eastwood made great play of the fact that —”
“We are going back to the days when lorries had to go through physical border posts and were stopped and searched etc, leading to delays and extra costs. Surely this can only be a regressive step. <BR /> <BR />I do not understand why a Minister in the Executive would even contemplate such a harmful levy that will have a negative impact on established businesses. The point was made earlier — and I will make it again — that our border areas face significant challenges. They have higher rates of unemployment and deprivation. Two of the most deprived wards in the North are in my own constituency. These businesses are also heavily reliant on border trade to survive. The levy will result in increased costs for these businesses, which could destabilise and even close some small businesses.”
“<BR /> <BR />In Newry, for instance, it is impossible not to notice the number of HGVs from the South delivering locally on a daily basis. Take shopping centres in Newry. In the Quays, for example, you can go from Debenhams at one end to Sainsbury's at the other. All that income goes back to Britain. The only income coming into our local economy is, usually, the minimum wage. People in my constituency cannot afford the extra burden that will inevitably be passed on. <BR /> <BR />The enforcement of this levy will impact on all businesses that transport goods across this island. It will actually discourage companies in Donegal, Louth, Monaghan and even Dublin from trading in the North. I cannot understand why we are creating barriers instead of building the economy.”
“You can interpret it whatever way you want. <BR /> <BR />Living in and representing Newry and Armagh, which is a border constituency, it is my responsibility to protect our local businesses and economy. That is certainly something that the Tory Government have no intention of doing. Over 80% of businesses on this island are small or medium enterprises. That includes local businesses. Any additional costs or levy will impact on local businesses, and ultimately that burden will be passed on to the local consumer. <BR /> <BR />What strikes me as peculiar is that, when I sat on the Social Development Committee with the Minister, he did not seem to be quite as wedded to parity as he seems to be now. Certainly, at a time, parity was not something that he was enamoured of, if I remember rightly.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I support the motion. <BR /> <BR />I will refer briefly to what Mr Maginness said. I have had the misfortune to listen to him during Budget debates. I thought that he invented filibustering. I also take exception to being referred to, as a member of Sinn Féin, as "these people". Common courtesy is obviously not his strong point, but I suppose that I should not expect anything else from him and his ilk.”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. Does he face any financial issues arising from the current economic crisis that might halt or delay that project? Go raibh maith agat.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Will the Minister outline how non-grammar post-primary schools have performed in recent years?”
“As I said, I am not a member of the Committee, but I think that affordable childcare in the North is such as essential item that anything that focuses on it is to be welcomed.”
“Presumably, the scheme will address that at some stage, although it is my understanding — I can be corrected if I am wrong — that children will still have to be looked after in crèches or the like. Crèches are extremely expensive. When we were conducting research, we found that there were a huge number of crèches in our area but that they were extremely expensive. People simply could not afford them, because they would be working simply to pay their childcare costs. That is an issue. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the legislative consent motion to introduce the scheme, but I think that there are gaps, particularly, as was mentioned, with the age factor. Children up to the age of 12 only are included, and that will have to be addressed as other schemes cater for children up to and beyond the age of 14.”
“I have met the group on a number of occasions, and, as Mr Moutray said, it has played a very constructive role in providing childcare when it was most needed. In that sense, its concerns need to be addressed, because people who make use of the voucher scheme will continue, as far as I know, with that, but I do not think that new people can be introduced. <BR /> <BR />The Bright Start scheme was launched by OFMDFM in September 2013, and it fits in with the Programme for Government targets. In my experience, however, a large number of families use informal childcare, whether that is offered by aunts, uncles, mothers, sisters or whomever, which has been an issue, as it means that they cannot access the childcare element of working tax credits.”
“<BR /> <BR />The legislative consent motion will increase the number of people who will be eligible for the childcare scheme. Previously, as I said, affordable childcare has not been easily or readily available. It appears that the new scheme will increase the numbers who are eligible, but there may still be gaps that need to be filled. The new tax-free childcare scheme will help to provide financial support for working families, which is to be welcomed, and, as far as I am aware from what has been said, it will also include self-employed people. <BR /> <BR />I understand that departmental officials have been asked to sit down and fully discuss issues that groups may want to raise, particularly Employers For Childcare, which has raised concerns.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I am not a member of the Committee of the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister, but I wish to say a few words on the subject, because, certainly in my experience, affordable childcare is absolutely essential, and, unfortunately, it has not been so affordable here in recent times. When I worked in the voluntary sector, we carried out a survey in the Newry area and found that we had one of the worst childcare facilities in western Europe. For a population of 90,000, there were around five registered childminders. The difficulty is that, for people on working tax credits to avail themselves of the childcare element, unless their child is being looked after by a registered childminder, they do not get it. That has caused trouble.”
“The Committee recommends that the introduction of referral-to-treatment targets be accompanied by a clearly defined policy on how compliance against targets will be enforced. I ask the Minister to consider that.”
“Officials replied that the board was actively looking at what incentives might be put in place. It said that the board had progressed discussions with a small number of provider organisations in the North in recent months around a small number of specialities. That has been a much more open-ended discussion, which is why they can move away from a transaction-based approach whereby the relationship with the board as a provider is to provide three of those. From the evidence presented, the board appears to favour a partnership approach with the trust, and the Committee acknowledges the value of that attitude in some circumstances. However, the Committee was concerned that the board's emphasis on partnership working with the trust was not matched with strong performance management arrangements.”
“The board said that only 25% of the funding is withdrawn and it is largely related to consumables and would not have an impact on patients, which, obviously, is what we are talking about. The impact that the waiting list has on patients should be paramount. <BR /> <BR />The board further advised that, in the first three quarters in 2013-14, £1·5 million was withdrawn from the trusts for underdelivery. The board advised the Committee that it was in the process of trying to change the nature of its relationship with the trusts away from a transactional arrangement to one where clinicians are more empowered. The board was quite firm in stating that it did not want to create a blame culture. The board was asked whether, if it did not favour a blame culture, it favoured using incentives.”
“The Committee discussed the issue of enforcing targets with the Department and the HSC Board during the evidence session. We were advised that the HSC Board has legislative responsibility for the performance management of trusts to ensure that ministerial targets are met. That includes targets for elective care. It is led, in the board, by the director of commissioning and the director of performance. Officials from the board told the Committee that, in 2013-14, it had introduced sanctions whereby, if a trust underperforms against its agreed core activity, funding is withdrawn. However, as the evidence session progressed, the board appeared to move away from the idea that the withdrawal of funding was a sanction or punishment for poor performance.”
“We were also given evidence on how approaches have been tried in Portugal. We were told that the Portuguese Government had produced benchmarks in productivity to identify which hospital or which sector in a hospital is performing badly compared with others. They also measure levels of non-conformity against rules that relate to maximum waiting times. The Portuguese Government operate a system whereby patients automatically receive a voucher when they reach 75% of the maximum waiting time, which is nine months in normal cases. The voucher can be used in a private hospital, and the public hospital must foot the bill. Mr Gomes, in his evidence, explained:”
“The Committee was advised that the withholding of revenues when targets are not met rather than heavily fining providers is another approach to enforcing targets. We were given evidence by Professor Siciliani, who told us:”
“Even though the targets-and-terror approach appears to have been successful in the English case, Dr Findlay introduced a word of caution. He said:”
“Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I, too, support the motion. I welcome the Minister here today. I reiterate what Mr McCarthy said: I thank the Committee staff for the work they have done in relation to the review. <BR /> <BR />During the Committee's review, the question of how best to enforce targets set for elective care emerged as a key issue. The Committee learned that, in England, a very strong approach, characterised as "targets and terror", was adopted. Under that system, NHS senior executive's jobs were under threat if their organisation performed poorly. In evidence, Dr Findlay said to the Committee:”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. On a recent 'Spotlight', consultants raised concerns around cancer research. How does the Minister respond to those concerns? Go raibh maith agat.”
“I just want to make the point that we need to bear in mind that carers will be one of the groups affected by the advent of welfare cuts.”
“These are two different concepts, and clarification is certainly needed. I know that one of the things that the Committee wants is clarification on what supported housing actually means. <BR /> <BR />I want to mention specifically the role of unpaid carers. Many older people who require some form of care depend on the invaluable role of informal, unpaid carers at home, whether they are family members or friends. It is estimated that unpaid carers save the health service here around £4·4 billion every year. Yet, a lot of these carers are older people who will eventually need to have someone care for them. If we are to implement TYC, which someone described as a vision without action, we need to put in place an infrastructure of proper domiciliary care and proper support for carers.”
“However, in the follow-up strategic implementation plan, the wording has evolved somewhat to older people living independently:”
“<BR /> <BR />Older people are the largest group of users of community health and social care services. They account for one fifth of the budget, currently £700 million. Keeping people at home or in less formal types of care is further complicated because responsibility for many aspects of housing rests separately in the Department for Social Development. As a member of the Social Development Committee, it is easy to see the cross-cutting and overarching issues. TYC lists older people as one of its key commitments and seeks to reduce the number of older people in formal care. TYC states that it wants to help older people to live independently:”
“There remains a heavy reliance on formal residential and nursing home care and informal care in the role of unpaid carers such as family members, and I will mention them later. <BR /> <BR />Here in the North, the number of people aged over 65 is expected to increase by 40% between 2010 and 2025. The number of very elderly people, those aged over 85, is expected to almost double. This means more people with long-term illnesses and disabilities. People are living longer but not necessarily more healthily. Obviously, this has implications for how and where people are cared for. The majority of older people want to remain living in their home, and policies such as Transforming Your Care have attempted to reflect that. However, the concept of care at home and in the local community is not new.”
“There is funding for two home improvement agencies, whose role is to advise and assist applicants who have a disability through the home improvements grant, in particular disabled facilities grants, and older people with a disability are the main recipients of that service. <BR /> <BR />At the moment, the majority of services for older people are provided by housing associations, with a number of services provided by the voluntary and community sector and the health and social care trusts. At this point, I will commend the voluntary and community sector for the work that it does in helping in that area of need. Caring for the ageing population is a complex, cross-cutting issue, and there has been a tendency to react to crisis events rather than having preventative support.”
“<BR /> <BR />The total supported housing budget spend for older people's services in 2012-13 was £8·93 million, and 425 accommodation-based services provided housing to over 10,300 people. Sheltered housing is the main form of provision for older people, but some more specialist supported living provision also exists for frail older people and older people with dementia. In addition, 10 floating support services support 345 people at any one time at a cost of £604,800. Those services cater for a range of clients from isolated and rural people to people with mental health and dementia needs.”
“Kieran pre-empted me, but I would have said it anyway because it is good to see the bridesmaid becoming the bride, if you will excuse the language. <BR /> <BR />There has been a long-term policy aim to shift care from institutional settings such as nursing and residential homes to a greater provision of services for older people living in their own home or in supported accommodation. The Supporting People programme was introduced in 2003, with the aim of commissioning housing support services to improve the quality of life and independence of vulnerable people. The new Supporting People strategy from 2012 to 2015 is aiming to build on the success of the original strategy.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I also support the motion. It would be churlish not to welcome the Health Minister here. I think that this is his first debate.”