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 8 of 11.
“As you say, it is very difficult for people who have buried issues for years to come to speak to the inquiry. We are trying our best to ensure that everybody feels safe and supported so that they can come forward. We have made an attempt to ensure that the support services are there for people when they go to the inquiry and that there is aftercare, which is an important part of this. I know from speaking to people that sometimes they might not need the support that day but would certainly need it in a week's time or whenever.”
“We were disappointed that the Home Secretary decided not to include it in the Westminster inquiry, but we hope that the inquiry here will have the same power to compel witnesses and everything else. We are working towards ensuring that people are not prevented from getting the truth. <BR /> <BR />I conclude by saying again that, in asking us for an extension, the judge has made a very compelling case. He wanted to ensure that everybody who wanted to be heard at the inquiry was heard. That is very important and is the reason why we agreed to an extra year. It is not fair that people who wanted to tell their story were not able to do so. Mr Poots talked about the difficulties that victims have experienced during the inquiry: I have been down there and witnessed the difficult situation at first hand.”
“I hope that that service is now in shape and is fit for purpose and that those people are making use of it. There is also a small grants scheme, which was initiated in the Department and has allowed SAVIA, for instance, to open a centre where people can come together and get support from one another. I visited the centre, and it seems to be working well. I cannot emphasise enough that our Department is trying its best to ensure that we can directly help victims and survivors as much as possible. <BR /> <BR />You mentioned Kincora and will be aware of the debate in the Chamber on that issue. We are seeking for that inquiry and the people who would go before it to have the same protections for victims.”
“The Member makes a valid point. That is why I say that there can be no commitment and that nothing can be done by anyone other than the judge. You are totally right. The judge stated that, until the inquiry completes its work, it is not likely to be in a position to make any recommendations. I am just saying that we are taking on board the concerns that have been raised. <BR /> <BR />I will go through a couple of other points. Chris Lyttle raised the issue of the judicial review. Obviously, the judicial review is being appealed, so I cannot go into that in any detail today. You also mentioned support services for victims. Again, over some time, I have had meetings with and spoken to victims and survivors, who have expressed concerns about the level of support.”
“As the Member will understand, I cannot give any commitment today. However, we have listened to the concerns of victims and survivors about the time the process has taken, and we will have further conversations. My first port of call will be a conversation with colleagues. I cannot, however, give any commitment today to do a, b or c.”
“First, I assure the Member that foremost in my mind is the need to provide the assurances and comforts that victims and survivors need.”
“We have to take on board what Judge Hart says, but I assure the House today that we will be open to looking at how we can address the concerns that victims and survivors have raised with me as a party member and yesterday as junior Minister.”
“The main issue raised by Members was about how the delay was having an effect on people who are now particularly elderly. I await that report. Another issue was the interim report. I am fully aware of the concerns of individual victims and survivors and of organisations. I met Survivors and Victims of Institutional Abuse (SAVIA) yesterday on the issue of an interim report and on redress. I endeavoured then to say that I would be in contact with my fellow junior Minister, Jonathan Bell, to look at the issue. Members will be aware — members of the Committee in particular — will be aware that Judge Hart was very much not in favour of doing an interim report, because he felt that it would delay the final report.”
“Ministers have received a scoping exercise that was initiated when the issue of the Toome baby came to the fore. We are looking at that at the moment. We have also had ongoing discussions about those who were over 18 and are not included in the current inquiry. Other Members, including Mr Attwood, talked about victims of clerical abuse outside of institutions. Again, we are looking at that to see how we can deal with those issues. Mr Attwood also talked about dealing with the past, and a proposal was put to the North/South Ministerial Council to have an initiative that would look at how to support all victims of sexual abuse and at how people can feel safe about coming forward and reporting abuse to the appropriate authorities.”
“I thank colleagues and fellow Members for their comments today. It is particularly encouraging to see the support here for the inquiry into historical institutional abuse. I take the opportunity to acknowledge the courage and dignity of victims and survivors as they participate in the public hearings at Banbridge Courthouse. I recognise that issues and concerns have been raised by Members about certain matters and will try to deal with them now. <BR /> <BR />First, I assure the Chairperson of the Committee that the fact that the draft order was laid before the Committee could consider its policy position was an oversight on the part of officials. I wanted to make that very clear. I am very aware of the people who fall outside of or are excluded from the current inquiry, particularly those who were over 18 and in institutions.”
“Respondents' comments were shared with the inquiry and, subsequently, with the OFMDFM Committee. The draft order was listed without comment in the report of the Examiner of Statutory Rules of 16 January, and the OFMDFM Committee approved the draft order at its meeting on 21 January. I believe that this subordinate legislation is necessary to allow the inquiry into historical institutional abuse to properly carry out its work. I therefore commend the order to the House.”
“A one-year extension will extend the timescale up to 18 July 2016 to complete the public hearings, with a report to the First Minister and deputy First Minister by 18 January 2017. The report will be laid before the Assembly as soon as is reasonably practical after its publication by Sir Anthony. <BR /> <BR />A targeted consultation on the draft order that focused on the historical institutional abuse victims and survivors groups was carried out over an eight-week period from 8 August to 3 October 2014. However, all late responses were accepted. As well as victims and survivors groups, the consultation paper was distributed to the Human Rights Commission and Amnesty International. All respondents were broadly supportive of the draft order and the one-year extension.”
“This order will accomplish that. <BR /> <BR />The process by which the inquiry's terms of reference can be amended is set out in its primary legislation. Section 1(3) of the Inquiry into Historical Institutional Abuse Act 2013 states:”
“To extend the time frame of the inquiry by one year, as requested by Sir Anthony, the inquiry terms of reference must be amended to stipulate:”
“The inquiry terms of reference stipulate:”
“<BR /> <BR />The First Minister and deputy First Minister agreed with Sir Anthony that the inquiry must be allowed to:”
“This order was laid in draft before the Assembly on 9 January 2015. The order will amend the terms of reference of the inquiry into historical institutional abuse, thus enabling the inquiry's time frame to be extended by one year. The chairperson of the inquiry, Sir Anthony Hart, has made a compelling case for a one-year extension to the inquiry time frame, most notably on the basis of the inquiry panel's experience of the first module. The first module spanned 11 weeks, 41 sitting days, had 79 witnesses, with over 19,000 pages of documentation and over 100,000 documents. The experience of module 1 meant that Sir Anthony was in a position to better calculate how many sitting weeks in will take to call all witnesses who wish to give evidence from every institution and every individual that the panel will or probably will investigate.”
“The Member will know that there is now a ministerial group looking at tackling domestic and sexual violence and, indeed, there is a strategy. There was a consultation with many of the stakeholder groups. People had some issues with the strategy as first drafted, but they are now well advanced with the incorporation of that strategy. That strategy will be going forward, not as a separate domestic violence strategy but as a domestic violence and sexual violence strategy.”
“I certainly agree that it was a very successful project. I and junior Minister Bell visited several schools. That project and the nurture groups project, which is also one of the signature projects, were in place. Having talked to some of the new teachers that were brought in, as well as to pupils and other teachers, we are confident that, as an Executive, we will be very mindful of the fact that, when we put in place something that works and is beneficial to young children, schools and children's educational needs, we need to make sure that it is continued.”
“The Member will be aware that the Delivering Social Change signature projects, including the one on literacy and numeracy, which the Member mentioned, were very successful. We are looking in the budget to continue that project in this and in the next financial year. We have had conversations with the Department of Education and the Minister of Education on that. We are working within the Delivering Social Change framework. We are hopeful that Departments and their Ministers will look at their core budgets and see where those six signature projects, which were a success, fit into them and then take them forward. We are in conversations with the Department of Education and the Minister on that specific topic.”
“People in those communities need to choose and bring forward projects and proposals, and I think that all those other community planning groups and boards are already interlinked.”
“No, there are no plans in the first instance. However, the social investment fund and the area plans never worked in isolation of other community-based planning that was already there, including neighbourhood renewal. I know that some of the neighbourhood renewal partnerships worked very closely on the steering groups and vice versa, so I think that there was already a joined-up sense of it when the social investment fund was initiated and designed. I think that that continues to be the case. As I said, community planning has to come from the people who live and work in those communities and who have a stake in those communities. It cannot be something that is put down from the top to tell people what they need.”
“Indeed, it is only the people who live and work in those areas and have a stakeholder sense of those areas who know what they need. In my opinion, we should listen to what the community needs. I was quite dismayed when that amendment came forward.”
“I was somewhat dismayed by the Ulster Unionist amendment to the Budget motion because it effectively sought to take money from the social investment fund — a fund that will ensure, at a very grass-roots community level, a realisation of area plans that local steering groups deemed appropriate and prioritised according to need in their zone. It is the right thing to do — we have talked about it in the Assembly on numerous occasions — to work with communities and in partnership with communities, and in this case the steering groups, to ensure that we get these projects right and maximise the impact that they have. However, the main point is that these projects were designed and chosen from the community up, and it is essential that we listen to what the local community needs.”
“The initial announcement of the approved projects was in February 2014. Once the economic appraisal is completed and the project is approved, we get the letter of offer out as quickly as possible. However, there is a point when it comes to the actual SIF steering group that the Member has said he is a member of — I have some knowledge of the steering group in my area — and the onus is on that group to inform the local projects that are part of the bigger project. <BR /> <BR />I take on board what you said, and I will certainly look into it. If there have been issues, I will certainly talk to the Member outside Question Time.”
“If there have been difficulties and problems, I give the Member a commitment that I will look into that.”
“The Member will know that 23 letters of offer were issued last year and that that went up to 24. A further nine projects were approved on, I think, 20 January and letters of offer for four of those projects have gone out. When a project is approved, we try to get the letters of offer out as quickly as possible to progress the whole project in the sense of the money and everything else. So, while there may not be a dedicated timeline as such, we try to do that, but it all has to be part of the process. That is the way the process has to evolve.”
“The Member will know that, from its initial stages, the social investment fund was always led by the community and statutory organisations that designed it from the bottom up. There is a SIF board, and it was primarily responsible for informing those community-based projects whether they were successful. So, it was really up to the steering groups to inform them, rather than OFMDFM.”
“If some individuals or groups have indicated that they have not been informed, they should contact their respective steering group, details of which are available on the OFMDFM website. Details of the chosen projects are also available on the OFMDFM website.”
“In keeping with the community-based ethos of the social investment fund (SIF), zonal steering groups made the final decisions on projects that were selected for their area plans. Individuals or groups who were involved in concepts that did not make it into the area plans were advised at the time by the consultants who were appointed to support the steering groups or by the steering groups themselves. <BR /> <BR />The area plans were submitted in February 2013. When the zonal allocations were subsequently announced, the steering groups were asked to prioritise their area plan projects within their assigned budgets. That process was completed by November 2013, and it was the responsibility of the steering groups to inform those involved of the decisions.”
“Yes, and I know that my colleague has on many occasions made that precise point. <BR /> <BR />I appeal to the Minister once again to restore the premia funding and to work with the college to find that agreed way forward that he talked about, which will ensure the sustainability and continuation of St Mary's on its current site.”
“It has played an outstanding role in the North's Catholic education system and is an essential part of the Catholic educational tradition. It continues to be valued as such, and has been for generations, by the parents and pupils who have attended Catholic schools and colleges. <BR /> <BR />The breadth of feeling about this issue is evident in the numbers that we saw even today attending protests up here, but also the huge numbers joining the campaign to save the college. I believe, and many people out there, Minister, believe, that the decision to remove this funding is not one that you have taken in the interests of higher and further education. It is more to do with the party political ideology of the Alliance Party. It is and will be viewed as an attack on Catholic education. I therefore —”
“I know that the MP for the area, Mr Paul Maskey, together with Professor Peter Finn, the principal of the college, and many others have been looking at ways to explore how academic integration can be deepened. They have also looked at the role of St Mary's in assisting the development of a shared approach. It is, therefore, crucial that the small and specialist funding is retained for St Mary's to enable those discussions to take place with the Minister and to achieve that agreed way forward. St Mary's, which has approximately 1,000 pupils and staff, has been a feature of the west Belfast community for over 100 years. It is unique in so many ways. It is a regional college, but is also important to the people of west Belfast. It is part of the local community infrastructure and a great asset to the local economy.”
“The small and specialist funding is an additional element of grant funding that is paid to the colleges to recognise the additional cost associated with the small, specialist nature of their academic provision. The removal of that funding, together with a general reduction of funding, as I said, would mean that St Mary's would face cuts in its budget for 2015-16 of 31% compared with 10·8% for other universities. Minister, how is that fair? Where is the equality in that? <BR /> <BR />I am aware that, when the Minister announced a review of initial teacher training education infrastructure, he indicated his commitment to seek an agreed way forward.”
“<BR /> <BR />I welcome Minister Farry's attendance and the meeting that he had yesterday with our party delegation, which was led by the deputy First Minister, Martin McGuinness. Again, I make a direct appeal to the Minister to see the important contribution that St Mary's makes to education and, indeed, to the wider community and to listen to Members' concerns and the breadth of feeling that we have seen on this issue across the North in recent days. <BR /> <BR />The premia funding was introduced in 2008 and was specifically designed to ensure the financial sustainability of the university colleges. The funding model, which included the premia, was supported by the Committee for Employment and Learning and formally endorsed by the Executive.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Let me say at the outset that I will not be taking the 15 minutes because I am very conscious that, given that this is such a serious debate, a number of my colleagues want to speak on it. So, I will try to get through what I have to say as quickly as possible. <BR /> <BR />Our party asked for this debate to highlight the level of concern at the proposal to remove the £1·1 million special premia allowance from St Mary's teacher training college. That, in effect, amounts to 20% of St Mary's total government funding. Together with the 10·8% proposed reduction in the college's recurrent grant, it would, if implemented, ensure that the college would become financially inviable and, therefore, could no longer continue to exist. That is the seriousness of the debate tonight.”
“I would like to see the motion passed and, from that, a commitment being made to go forward in a unified way to protect the core public services that we set out in the motion.”
“The unity of purpose that we had needs to be maintained if we are to deliver the improvements that people in our communities need, that families need and that individuals need. We need to oppose and mitigate the worst effects of the assault on public services and the Tory welfare cuts. <BR /> <BR />In conclusion, this is not the time for politicking or petty party political point scoring; we need to put that behind us. There is still much to be done. There is a clear responsibility on all parties in this House and on all parties in the Executive to make power sharing and partnership government work and go forward in a way that protects and maintains our core public services, which everyone, especially the most vulnerable in our society, needs.”
“The Budget that we have, which was just discussed, is not the Budget that many of us wanted to see being taken forward. However, we came at both to try to do the best that we could under the circumstances and the limited resources that we have to try to protect our core public services and, as I said, protect those who need those services the most. <BR /> <BR />Decisive and positive leadership is what we now need from all political parties to ensure that we approach the way forward in a unified way. We saw how a unified approach got us into negotiations with the British Government to get a better financial package, and we need to go forward when we are implementing this agreement and are doing what we want to do to protect our public services.”
“Our party is on the record as stating that it is important that the continuation of working towards the implementation of those agreements in full is brought forward. <BR /> <BR />It is clear that we in the North of Ireland have higher levels of poverty, more families on low incomes and a high percentage of people with disabilities and mental health issues. We need policies and services that recognise our unique circumstances as a society emerging from conflict and that reflect the consequences of years of division and underinvestment here. <BR /> <BR />The agreement now known as the Stormont House Agreement was not the comprehensive agreement that we set out to achieve, but we believe — and I heard it mentioned during the previous debate on the Budget — that it represented progress.”
“<BR /> <BR />That is why, in financial terms, we sought the support of all the other parties in the Executive to go to the British Government in a unified way to secure an improved financial package, to defend public services and, more importantly, to protect the most vulnerable from the ongoing cuts to the welfare system. <BR /> <BR />We also sought for the parties and two Governments to build on the Haass proposals on dealing with the past and the complex issues of identity and parades and that outstanding commitments that both Governments had agreed to previously would be implemented. That included the inquiry into the killing of human rights solicitor Pat Finucane and that an Irish language Act and bill of rights should be brought forward. <BR /> <BR />We all know that those issues were not dealt with.”
“<BR /> <BR />That is why it is more important than ever that we have a welfare system that protects the most vulnerable. That includes families on low incomes, the sick and the disabled. We have seen over recent years with the economic downturn thousands losing their jobs and then their homes. Now, we see an assault on welfare and the privatisation of public services and how low-income families, the sick and disabled are being impacted on once again. <BR /> <BR />As a party, when we entered into the recent talks, we set out to secure a comprehensive agreement. It was no secret to anyone inside or outside this House that the very stability of the political institutions here was under threat and that we needed a collective approach by all parties to try to find a solution and way forward.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. The motion illustrates the great difficulties that the Executive and Assembly face in how we deliver and protect public services, especially health, education and welfare. That is in the face of year-on-year cuts to the block grant. We have seen the direct impact of that on our services and on families and communities that we represent. <BR /> <BR />Tory cuts to welfare and other essential services have already forced millions in Britain deeper into poverty, so much so that many depend every day on food banks and charities for the basic day-to-day necessities. I am certain that I am not the only MLA to see the growing numbers of families coming into our constituency offices who are finding it more and more difficult just to get by financially each day.”
“I am grateful for the opportunity to take part in this discussion.”
“Someone said earlier that there was always a lot of good work being done in peace building and reconciliation at a grassroots level in local communities. That happened years before we entered into a peace process. I think that we need to develop that more, and we need to make sure that the programmes and projects on the ground that work are resourced and funded in the way that they need to be. I also think that we need to look at civil society. We need to look at the voluntary sector and the community sector, and we all need to work together with the statutory sector in local government and central government, because the only way in which we are going to make those changes is by ensuring that everyone comes together and decides that that is the future that they want for their children and grandchildren.”
“<BR /> <BR />We want the North to be seen as a place where people want to invest because we have a truly shared, inclusive and vibrant society, which, as I said, is based on equality. That society needs to be committed to providing a better future for all our people, and combating division is a vital first step to achieving that. Building a united community that is based on equality of opportunity, the desirability of good relations and the promotion of reconciliation is important for us not only as we move from conflict and division, but in shaping a modern, diverse and sustainable community that is better equipped for the future. <BR /> <BR />I want to make one concluding remark. Politicians cannot do it on their own. We need to work more collaboratively with people in local communities. A lot of good work is going on at the grassroots.”
“Instead of individual Ministers from different political parties working in silos in their Departments and to their narrow political mindsets, we could work collaboratively between the Departments and deliver much better for all the people in our community. <BR /> <BR />People have quite rightly said that it is about the whole community. We are a more diverse community and are not just the two communities any more. We are more diverse and have more and more people coming here to live and work. If we base our policies and strategies on equality of opportunity, tolerance and respect, we will go a lot further when we take those forward. I am very conscious of the time.”
“Sometimes, it is people's mindsets that prevent more shared spaces and people coming together in shared housing, shared education and all that. We need to change those attitudes and, in a sense, that is one of the biggest challenges for us when we are looking at tackling the problems and building a united community. <BR /> <BR />I want to touch on some of the issues of public expenditure. The challenging public expenditure environment does not preclude us from striving towards our vision. We continue to work proactively with Departments to identify opportunities to build on existing work through greater collaboration. <BR /> <BR />One of the things that could be done at an Executive level to develop it into something that we could use in the next Programme for Government is to use the framework for Delivering Social Change.”
“<BR /> <BR />At the outset, there was a total of 59 interface barriers, 22 of which were owned by the Housing Executive. The joint agency approach to the removal of interfaces, led by the Department of Justice, has resulted in a reduction in the number of interface barriers from 59 to 53, and engagement is ongoing with 40 of the 53 remaining areas. <BR /> <BR />I know that it has been said in the debate, but it cannot be the case that people just go in and remove the barriers. A lot of work has to be done in the lead-up to that. We also have to try to build a more reconciled community that is tolerant and that has respect. It is about changing attitudes. That is one of the key areas that we have to change first before we try to make any practical changes.”
“I take your point. I will not stand here and say that those programmes are there. We need to look at that and at building towards doing that. As I said, I know people who had to move out of a shared neighbourhood, having moved into one, because of the conflicts that were there. I take your point, and I think that a lot more work needs to be done. That is all that I can say. As I said, I am just working within the constraints of what I am saying today, but I know that a lot more work needs to be done in that area. <BR /> <BR />The good relations programme board comprises senior officials from all Departments, who will act as senior responsible officers for the various aspects of the strategy's delivery. The programme board will operate under the strategic direction of the ministerial panel and will report to it on delivery and performance.”