Jennifer McCann
West Belfast · Sinn Féin · Northern Ireland
“I have listened to the answers that you have given. What steps will you and your Department take to address the issue? As you mentioned, quite a percentage of schools are failing to meet the entitlement framework requirements. What actual steps will your Department take?”
“I begin by echoing what my two colleagues said: we will oppose the motion and support the DUP amendment. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the general direction of travel of the draft area plan. It puts the needs of children and young people at the heart of the planning process.”
“I want to say again — we have had this in debates — about the excellent results in my constituency of West Belfast in educational outcomes. It clearly shows that, when the right intervention is made in those areas, the children shine and their potential comes through.”
“It is not just about their academic achievements but about giving them the skills to deal with life's problems and difficulties. <BR /> <BR />The plan also seeks to close the attainment gap. That issue should be of great concern to all of us and the wider community.”
“I hope that in the final area planning it will be. I have seen it at first hand with programmes like New Start in west Belfast. We all want children to go to mainstream education, but, for whatever reason, mainstream education just does not suit some children's needs and does not do it for them.”
“It is not just about school buildings, but school buildings sometimes can be crucial, particularly in an area where, for instance, they do not have sporting facilities in a school. The Minister will be aware of the campaign in the Colin area of west Belfast for a new school.”
The complete record
Every one of 538 lines we hold for Jennifer McCann, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 11.
“While Mr McCallister's amendment goes beyond the scope of the institutional reform provisions outlined in the Fresh Start Agreement, it is the view of Ministers that the question of whether the Assembly needs to place on itself a legislative imperative for such a review, in addition to its existing power to commission one from AERC, and, therefore, whether to accept or reject this amendment are matters that should be left to the judgement of Members.”
“<BR /> <BR />We note the provisions in John McCallister's amendment No 3 that, should there be a change to the number of constituencies as a result of the 2018 parliamentary boundary review, the Assembly and Executive Review Committee (AERC) would be legislatively mandated to review the proposed reduction in the number of Members returned for each constituency. We further note that the amendment also calls for AERC to report on the findings of its review before 1 December 2018 and give consideration to the desirability of reducing the number of Assembly Members to below 90. <BR /> <BR />The Assembly Members (Reduction of Numbers) Bill has a very specific objective: to reduce by one the number of Members returned by each constituency and for this change to have effect from the first Assembly election after that of 2016.”
“These amendments will guarantee that, should Royal Assent not be obtained before the election on 5 May, the reduction in the number of MLAs will still apply to the next election held after the forthcoming election in May. <BR /> <BR />As the previous debates on the Bill focused mainly on the question of an earlier date than 2021 for it to come into effect, we think it unlikely that any Member would want a situation where it was deferred until 2026. Therefore, I ask Members to support these amendments, which preserve the policy objective of the Bill.”
“As the Bill deals with a reserved matter that is not ancillary to a transferred matter, the Speaker is, therefore, required to refer it to the Secretary of State before it enters Final Stage. The Secretary of State is subsequently obliged to lay it before Parliament for 20 sitting days before it can be submitted for Royal Assent. <BR /> <BR />To address that potential problem we have, therefore, brought forward two technical amendments to the Bill. Amendment No 1 makes a minor change to clause 1(2) to refer to the 2016 election. Linked to that is an amendment to clause 1(3), which provides a definition of the term "2016 election" by referring to section 31(1) of the NI Act 1998.”
“Amendment No 1, together with amendment No 2, makes a technical adjustment to the Bill that does not change its substance or affect the policy behind it. The policy intent of the Bill is to reduce the number of MLAs elected to the first Assembly after the next election, that is, the 2016 Assembly election. For the Bill to achieve that, it must be enacted before the Assembly election on 5 May 2016; otherwise, the next election to which the reduction will apply will be the 2026 election, rather than the anticipated 2021 election. <BR /> <BR />We are grateful to the Assembly for agreeing to accelerated passage for the Bill, but even with that, there remains a risk that, at this late stage, Royal Assent may not be obtained in time because of the need to complete subsequent stages after Final Stage.”
“After all the debate that has taken place and the arguments that have been aired, it is difficult to do anything other than reiterate that, while we respect the position of the Alliance Party that we should move almost immediately to a reduction in the size of the Assembly, the view of the other parties is that that should be moderated by a period in which the Assembly and the parties represented in it can consider and address the implications for equality and inclusiveness that have also been raised and that are equally valid to the Alliance Party's urgent desire for downsizing. <BR /> <BR />Therefore, I ask Members to join me in voting against the amendment.”
“<BR /> <BR />Consideration of the matter continued during last week's accelerated passage and Second Stage debates, when, once again, a significant majority of Members demonstrated clear support for the Bill, including its effective date. It is therefore the case that there has emerged a clear majority agreement on a specific point of timing, and the Assembly, including even Members from the Alliance Party, might have reasonably concluded that it was now a settled matter. <BR /> <BR />In spite of that level of agreement and evidence of overwhelming support for the Bill taking effect for the Assembly election after that in May this year, the Alliance Party still considers it necessary to pursue the matter through this amendment.”
“That motion, in common with the proposed amendment that we are discussing today, called on the Executive to ensure that the proposed reduction in the number of MLAs applies to the 2016 election. Following a full debate, that proposal was resoundingly defeated without even the need for a Division. <BR /> <BR />Next, we had consideration of the Bill by the Assembly and Executive Review Committee on 19 January, when my colleague junior Minister Pengelly and I explained to the Committee why the Bill needed to progress by accelerated passage. During that discussion, all but one of the Committee members supported the provisions of the Bill, including the proposed timescale for them to take effect.”
“Go raibh maith agat, Mr Speaker. I oppose amendment No 1, which is the only amendment tabled. The purpose of the amendment is to have the proposed reduction in the number of MLAs returned from each constituency come into effect in time for the May 2016 election, rather than in 2021. That has been subject to lengthy discussion and debate over the last few weeks and months, most recently last week during the Second Stage debate. <BR /> <BR />The time that the Bill's provisions should take effect was first raised in the Chamber on 23 November last year, less than a week after the publication of the 'Fresh Start Agreement' and the Executive's agreement to the Bill. At that time, a private Member's motion from Alliance Party Members, whose party tabled the amendment today, was debated.”
“Obviously, there has been some discussion at Executive level on where different areas of policy responsibility should sit. The Member will be aware that, over the next period, we will have time in the Assembly to discuss the different functions that go into the different Departments. We have tried to keep that fit as well as it can be kept. The important thing for a strategy such as the active ageing strategy is that it is an Executive strategy, not an OFMDFM one. It is a strategy for which all Departments are accountable. They fulfil their responsibilities when they are caring for older people in society. That is done right across the board, in services or whatever. It is an Executive responsibility, as opposed to an OFMDFM one.”
“Certainly, that is the way that we will be monitoring and progressing it.”
“The next steps will be to monitor progress against the outcomes set out in the strategy, and we will consult on the draft indicators as well. Junior Minister Pengelly and I were at an event earlier today, called Dignity Action Day, which was organised by the National Pensioners Convention. Basically, we signed up to what was called a "dignity charter", if you like. At that event, it was very clear that people's dignity and rights need to be respected throughout their life. Just because someone gets older does not mean that they have any less of a contribution to make to society. When we were looking at the strategy, we were saying that it was a very live strategy. It is not just about the strategy; it is about how the strategy and those services are rolled out, and how those rights are protected and that respect is given to older people.”
“The strategy sets out a vision for an age-friendly region, in which people, as they get older, are valued and supported to live actively to their fullest potential, with their rights and dignity protected. The strategic aims of the strategy are based around the UN principles for older persons. There are 18 of those, which are grouped under five themes: independence; participation; care; self-fulfilment; and dignity. The strategy's vision and strategic aims will be implemented by those Departments and agencies with the resources, expertise and specific responsibilities for key programmes and services that improve the lives of older people.”
“The Executive's active ageing strategy was published on the Department's website on Tuesday 26 January. The purpose of the strategy is to transform attitudes to, and services for, older people. It is important that we fully acknowledge the enormous contribution that older people make to our society and that we challenge the negative stereotyping of them. The strategy will provide direction for Departments' policies; make connections between strategies; and lead to the improvement of services for older people. <BR /> <BR />In developing the strategy, we worked closely with the former Commissioner for Older People, Claire Keatinge, and the ageing strategy advisory group, which included as members older people and people working for organisations that represent older people.”
“We are now in a position where £58 million has been committed and £22 million has been allocated to projects that are in the approval process. In my opinion, that is progress.”
“I understand that everybody was frustrated that the programme took a while to be rolled out, but I remind the Member that £58 million has been committed since 22 January. A further £22 million of the £80 million has been allocated to projects that are in the approval process. There are about nine revenue projects that are in the process now and have started. Five capital projects are at the construction stage, two are due to be completed, as I said, by 31 March, and one has already been completed in Coleraine. <BR /> <BR />You have to understand that revenue projects are not just projects that you spend money on right away. Some of the revenue projects will be over a two or three-year period, so you do not just spend it right away anyway. They will have to be given money as they go along. We have to remember that this was a new programme.”
“In other areas, the other junior Minister and I have been at launches, and, from talking to people who have participated in the programmes, we know that they have been quite successful in the way they were rolled out.”
“I totally agree with the Member's last comment. I think we learned the lesson, through the Urban Village programme, that you have to make a connection with the council, particularly in terms of community planning. It is very important with capital projects that you are not doing one thing in central government and another in local government. These projects, particularly those relating to the social investment fund, were ones where the community came together and decided who would be in the steering groups. They were the ones who decided which projects were the most important going forward. <BR /> <BR />You are totally right about the early intervention and employment projects.”
“Also, letters of offer have been issued to the approved components of the zone's capital cluster project. We are working to expedite approvals for the remaining three revenue projects.”
“The social investment fund is a growing success story. It is at the heart of the Executive's Delivering Social Change framework, making life-changing differences to people in communities facing disadvantage. Twenty-five projects, valued at £37 million, have now commenced, with 10 operational and more in the pipeline. In addition, over 600 participants are benefiting from projects in areas such as early intervention, employment and childcare. We can expect these numbers to ramp up significantly as delivery continues. <BR /> <BR />Belfast East allocated £8 million to employment, education and capital projects. Good progress has been made on the capital side with two of the capital projects — Best of the East and Bryson Street Surgery — due to complete construction by 31 March 2016.”
“A Fresh Start has provided a basis for addressing some of our most intractable issues here. It has made it possible for us to move forward on an area that will benefit good government and society as a whole. That is what it is about; it is about people in our community, it is not about us up here. I commend the Bill to the Assembly.”
“Sometimes, when Members talk about voters, they can be quite — I do not know how to describe it — disingenuous and insulting. People vote for the people whom they want to vote for. Voters know exactly what they want from the Assembly and from their Assembly Members. We have to respect how people vote and the choices that they make. <BR /> <BR />I finish by thanking Members for all their contributions to the debate and for the questions and issues that many raised. I hope that I have been able to answer them to their satisfaction.”
“<BR /> <BR />Gordon Lyons talked about some of the financial gains that would result from the Bill, and I think that it was Andy Allen who talked about hoping to see other reforms coming forward in conjunction with it. <BR /> <BR />Other Members had quite a negative view of the Bill. We listen to the woes and the negativity, and we hear all the time from Members such as Jim Allister and John McCallister about the dysfunctionality of the Assembly. If you go out and ask communities what they want, they will say that they want to see Members working together in the Assembly, coming to a consensus, getting work done and changing the quality of life out there. No one can predict how Assembly elections will work out, but the people will get their answer.”
“When we look around the Assembly — we have had debates about this — we need to see that it is more representative of society. The fact that over half the population are women needs to be represented in the Assembly as well. <BR /> <BR />Paul Frew talked about the importance of consensus and of Ministers not working in silos. <BR /> <BR />Chris Hazzard said that the Bill gives parties the ability to adapt to meet the needs of being a more diverse and representative Assembly, which, I think, everybody would agree with. He also mentioned that one of the principal reasons why 2021 was chosen was to give parties the time and opportunity to examine issues of equality and diversity.”
“I reiterate that it is to give parties the opportunity to examine and address any equality issues that might be anticipated as a consequence of the Bill, and the time to put in place the measures needed to address those issues. That is the main reason. <BR /> <BR />I emphasise that we had a debate and vote on this not so long ago, and the consensus was to make the change in 2021, not 2016. I think that the balance between making an immediate change and dealing with concerns about the impact on diversity and, in particular, gender equality has been emphasised here today. Parties need more time to look at those issues and to work to promote more female candidates, for example. I know that some Members touched on that.”
“He emphasised that waiting until 2021 would give parties the opportunity to examine and address any impact on the equality and diversity issues that might come up. <BR /> <BR />Mike Nesbitt mentioned the 2018 parliamentary boundaries. I know that he is not here, but I have to say that the Bill cannot deal with constituencies, nor can the Assembly legislate to change from Westminster constituencies to another system, unless it is the will of this Administration to ask the British Government to examine that. If that is the way that people want to go, that is what they have to do. <BR /> <BR />Chris Lyttle asked for an explanation of why we are waiting until 2021, and I think that other Members asked the same question.”
“He stressed the responsibility on all parties to ensure that the reduction would not result in a reduction in the number of women elected to the Assembly. <BR /> <BR />David McIlveen outlined that the consensus and the political will are here now to reduce the number of MLAs in the next election, in 2021. He hoped that narrow party politics, some of which we heard again today, could be set aside in the debate and vote and that Members could support the Bill. <BR /> <BR />Alex Attwood explained the reasons and unique circumstances that led, following the Good Friday and subsequent agreements, to the number of MLAs that we have, and he talked, in particular, about equality and diversity issues.”
“<BR /> <BR />This is a straightforward Bill with a simple purpose: to reduce the number of MLAs in the Assembly from 108 Members to 90 Members through each of the current 18 parliamentary constituencies returning five Members rather than six. The arrangements will apply at the first election following the forthcoming Assembly election in May this year. It represents a major plank in the Government's declared objective of reforming our institutional structures. <BR /> <BR />I will cover some of the points that some Members raised Hopefully, I will cover the main points. Pat Sheehan, the Deputy Chair of the Assembly and Executive Committee, outlined the work and the consensus of the Committee in its 2012 report. He highlighted the potential implications, particularly for some of the smaller parties.”
“I am grateful for Members' contributions to the debate. Some have been valuable and, indeed, informative. Reforming institutional structures has been a declared objective of government here for many years, and reducing the number of MLAs has been recognised as a key element of reform. The Bill represents a major element in the process of reform. The issue addressed in the Bill has been the subject of a review and report from the Assembly and Executive Review Committee in 2012. The British Government also consulted on the size of the Assembly in August 2012. It was the subject of further detailed consideration during the political process leading to the Stormont House Agreement in December 2014, and it featured in last December's talks process, which led to the Fresh Start Agreement.”
“Clause 1 amends section 33(2) of the NI Act 1998 by changing the number of Members returned for each parliamentary constituency from six to five. The clause also provides that that reduction will apply to the first election after the next Assembly election. Although that is envisaged as being the May 2021 election, the reduction would also be triggered by an extraordinary election that might be held between May 2016 and May 2021. Clause 2 provides the Bill's short title. <BR /> <BR />Although a small Bill, the Assembly Members (Reduction of Numbers) Bill is nevertheless a significant one that will be seen as a measure of the Assembly's willingness to play a full part in the streamlining of our institutions of government. I commend the Bill to the Assembly.”
“That allows the Assembly to legislate to change the number of MLAs returned for each constituency but restricts any such change to a reduction by one. The Act also prohibits any provision being made for different numbers of Members being returned for different constituencies. <BR /> <BR />As it is a reserved matter, the Secretary of State's consent was required for the introduction of the Bill in the Assembly. It is also the Secretary of State's responsibility, ultimately, to submit the Bill for Royal Assent. That will only occur provided the Bill has cross-community support at the point at which it is passed by the Assembly. <BR /> <BR />Given the very limited scope for change in the number of Members to be returned, the Bill consists of just two clauses.”
“It was also in recognition of the consensus that the British Government originally included the provision in the NI (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2014 to allow the Assembly to legislate for a reduction or increase of one in the number of Members returned by each constituency. <BR /> <BR />Members will be aware that section 33 of the NI Act 1998 provides for each of our parliamentary constituencies to return six Members to the Assembly. The purpose of the Bill that I bring before you today is to reduce that number from six to five. As I have indicated, section 6 of the NI (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2014 provides that alteration in the number of Members of the Assembly returned by each constituency is a reserved matter.”
“<BR /> <BR />From the discussion that has already taken place on the issue and as alluded to in the earlier debate, it is clear that, while there is an acknowledgement of the particular circumstances here that might justify an Assembly membership that is larger than those of the other devolved institutions, there is a broad consensus among the parties in the Assembly that there should be a reduction in the number of MLAs elected to it. That was demonstrated most recently during the debate on 23 November on the Alliance Party's motion to effect the reduction in the number of MLAs in time for this year's election rather than wait until 2021. While the motion was defeated, that was due to the question of timing rather than on the principle of the reduction, which was widely supported.”
“Most recently, in 2012, the Assembly and Executive Review Committee conducted a review of the size of the Assembly and received representations from political parties, academics and a range of stakeholders. That review explored options for a reduction in the total number of MLAs but did not reach a consensus on the figure. That said, a reduction to five in the number of Members returned for each constituency was the figure most commonly referenced in contributions during the Committee's consideration of the matter.”
“Both the Stormont House Agreement and the Fresh Start Agreement set out a number of proposed changes to the institutions so that they might function more efficiently and economically and better meet the needs of citizens. One of those was a reduction in the number of Departments; another — the one that we are examining today — was a commitment to reduce the number of MLAs returned for each constituency from six to five. <BR /> <BR />As my colleague junior Minister Pengelly indicated during the debate on the accelerated passage of the Bill, reform of the institutions, including the size of the membership of the Assembly, has been the subject of lengthy and detailed discussion and debate for a considerable period.”
“In their introduction to the Fresh Start Agreement, the First Minister and deputy First Minister stated:”
“Go raibh maith agat, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, I beg to move”
“Nobody at all should be disadvantaged or excluded from those services. I appeal for those community-based services to be resourced in the way in which they should and deserve to be.”
“I have seen and known those children to shine when they get extra encouragement in an alternative education centre. It is about keeping it locally based. <BR /> <BR />I want to finish by appealing to the Ministers who have responsibility and to Departments and Members to recognise the valuable contribution made by education and alternative education that is community-based, particularly in areas such as West Belfast that have high levels of social and economic deprivation. We do not want to exclude people from educating themselves and going on to training and getting a better skill set. That is a route out of poverty for people and families, and it is very important. I appeal again to the Ministers who have responsibility to ensure that these services are properly resourced and funded. We need to deliver services effectively.”
“I certainly agree with the Member. I have been involved in numerous meetings with the Member and other colleagues here from West Belfast. I speak to the Ministers who have responsibility for further education and for education in general, and I speak to the Social Development Minister, who has responsibility for the support mechanisms, such as the women's centre childcare fund. The issue with funding is that it is being directed to the further education colleges — out of community-based and alternative education and into statutory provision. We have to go back to basics and recognise that it does not suit everybody to go to further or higher education colleges. It is fine for the people it suits — as I said, we want most children to remain in mainstream school education — but it just does not suit some children to be educated in that way.”
“Given the opportunity, they will shine. Some young people need to get a leg up, if you like, or a hand up and a wee bit more encouragement than other children. Newstart Education Centre provides for the most marginalised and vulnerable. <BR /> <BR />As I said, I have seen many young people go through Newstart and have spoken to many of their families in the years that it has been in existence. It helps them at a vulnerable time in their life. It is also very cost-effective. Community-based education and alternative education can work out cheaper than some statutory provision. As I emphasised at the beginning, this is not all about funding; it is about recognising the difficulties that are there for some people.”
“That is very important because, when they believe in themselves, they can believe in what they can achieve and in the potential that they have. I am a firm believer that all our children and young people have potential. They have talents and skills.”
“The young people go on to attain educational achievements that they probably would not have got in other settings. <BR /> <BR />I want to make this point: obviously, the best option for all children and young people is to be educated through mainstream school provision. No one here wants to try to argue with that, but there is always going to be that smaller group of children and young people who, for whatever reason, are not suited to mainstream education. To go back to what I said earlier, their needs have to be met as well. We cannot marginalise and exclude people because they are not with the bigger group. As I said, the Newstart Education Centre works with young people who, for whatever reason, have fallen out of mainstream education. It supports and encourages those young people to believe in themselves.”
“I know of many places across West Belfast that, owing to cuts in resources and funding, have had to withdraw the provision that they had previously provided in those types of centres. <BR /> <BR />I also want to concentrate on alternative education. I know that there are a number of alternative education providers across West Belfast, but I want to single out one provider that I have worked with for a number of years and that has been based in West Belfast for over 25 years: the Newstart Education Centre. Alternative education centres provide a particular service for vulnerable young people. Sometimes, that can be a lifeline for them and their families, because the centres not only educate them but encourage them and help them gain confidence in those settings.”
“That meant that, if they were doing a class in a particular women's centre, they could leave their children in the crèche in the building. They were content to go into that class and programme of learning because they knew that their child was getting well looked after and that, if anything was wrong, they would be there for their child. That provision in women's centres is very important. <BR /> <BR />When we are looking into community education, we need to be aware that, by not having community-based education programmes, we could be excluding people — possibly very vulnerable people — from accessing education and training. We could also be excluding people who have no way of having their children minded, other than in a crèche.”
“Therefore, there has to be some sort of strategic thinking involved when we are looking at this. Local, community-based education projects are being downgraded. They are being starved of funding, and, in some of the women's centres, participants can do only level 1 qualifications. That hinders learners' progression when they want to go on to do further courses. Again, we need to take a strategic view. We need to look at this holistically, not piecemeal. <BR /> <BR />Women returners in particular can be impacted on. I speak to women returners all the time, particularly those who have young children and dependants. They used to be able to take courses in women's centres that were locally based and easy to get to, and they could avail themselves of an on-site crèche facility.”
“That is their choice, but a lot of people I have spoken to and know — constituents of mine in West Belfast — have put forward the view that they want to study and train in a more localised and familiar setting that has more support networks for them. I ask Members to imagine people who have been away from education or training for a long time; for instance, adult returners. Sometimes, it is very hard to take that first step and say, "I want to go into further education" or "I want to have further training". They do not really want to go to a big college that is based in the centre of a city or a town. They want to go somewhere where they feel that they are being encouraged and supported. Sometimes, you have to look at the confidence levels of some of the people who are returning to education and training after a long time.”
“<BR /> <BR />There has been debate in the House in recent months, and I do not have to labour the point, but there is a view, particularly in local communities, organisations and sectors that deliver community-based education that education is basically disappearing from being delivered in a local setting. People seem to see higher and further education colleges as being where the services and people are being directed to, should they choose to go down that route. <BR /> <BR />It is not just about choice; it is about meeting the individual needs of the student. Those needs can be very different in each case. The individual needs of the student must be given priority. Some people prefer to go to a further or higher education college.”
“Go raibh maith agat, Mr Deputy Speaker. I very much welcome the opportunity to open today's Adjournment debate and to raise the important issue of community-based and alternative education in West Belfast. While the debate is about ensuring that the necessary resources are directed to community-based education, it is also about setting out the stall for community-based and alternative education to be recognised as the valuable asset that it is. It should be recognised as a quality service that promotes academic achievement and develops a person's skill set.”
“<BR /> <BR />I thank Members for their contributions, and I wish to say that, as with the other Stormont House Agreement matters, the conclusion of 'A Fresh Start' has provided a basis for progressing this important legislation. The provision for good government through streamlined and efficient administration, improved opportunities for policy development, savings on unnecessary bureaucracy and the delivery of better services to the public will be the ultimate outcomes of the Departments Bill. We must move quickly, however, if we are to grasp the opportunity to have restructuring in place when the new Assembly meets in May 2016. That requires accelerated passage of the Departments Bill. I therefore ask the Assembly to approve the motion.”