Paul Frew
North Antrim · Democratic Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“I thank the Minister for that intervention. Nevertheless, there are concerns that I want to address. The Minister and the departmental officials will know that, even from the range of questions that I have asked. We need to make sure that we get the balance correct.”
“In the written and oral evidence received then, the Committee was advised of potential amendments that the Minister may table at Consideration Stage, including an amendment to remove the commissioner that is being considered in liaison with OLC.”
“That in itself causes some victims and witnesses bother, because they are in a system that they are not part of, which means that they do not get the support that they require. That can sometimes leave them feeling retraumatised, as though they have been put through the wringer again.”
“The Bill makes provision to offer those protections and provide clarity to victims that they do not have to face their perpetrator in court. <BR /> <BR />Members asked questions about a range of matters, including the independence of the office, the ability to review the performance of any future commissioner, the costs of establishing th…”
“I thank the Minister for her intervention. She was absolutely right to take that action, as it means that victims' voices are right at the heart of the matters under discussion. It is now obvious to us that that should have been done years ago, but it is good that it is being done now.”
“Officials explained that the Bill would legislate on the disclosure regime not to prevent an application for disclosure but to set out a process whereby the defence would have to show the relevance of the information that it was requesting. That is an important protection.”
The complete record
Every one of 3,736 lines we hold for Paul Frew, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 75.
“The Minister makes a valid point, and we have ironed it out in the debate. The offence should therefore really be about posting the footage on an open forum rather than recording the incident.”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. She has hit on something really intriguing. She gave the example of somebody who was of good character all their life and cracked. That person will also have been found guilty at that point at which a character reference is submitted. On the basis of what she has just said, would they be deserving of a good character reference when they have been found guilty?”
“Will the Minister explain a wee bit more about how that would come about, who would call for that and how the judge would be made aware of that evidence?”
“The Bill will be scrutinised, the Committee will do its work diligently, and we will get to a point where we can have a Consideration Stage that is just as productive as the one that we had on the Justice Bill.”
“I thank the Minister for that. Throughout the Consideration Stage debates on the Justice Bill, we had good humour. That has been a marked change during the years that I have been Chair of the Committee. I have really enjoyed the engagement that we have had with the Minister and the Department in all of the processes and debates. In that spirit, I will work with the Minister throughout Committee Stage and at the further legislative stages to get what we all want, which is good legislation. I can give you a commitment now, Minister, that I have nothing in my head at the minute, so at the next stage you will not be able to say that I brought half a Bill, as I said to you, Minister, at the Second Reading of the Justice Bill. <BR /> <BR />The debate will be good-natured and robust.”
“I give her the guarantee that, if we have any brainstorming sessions where we look for amendments, we will certainly get to them as early as we possibly can so that the Department and the Minister can have sight of them and make a good assessment of those amendments as they come and as we think of them. <BR /> <BR />This is another good day in the life of the Assembly as a legislature. Again, I emphasise that the Bill has victims and witnesses at its heart, so it is a good day. I will take great pleasure and honour in working on and scrutinising the Bill in the Committee. I will see where I can table amendments to it to make it even better legislation.”
“Although she will appreciate the difficulties and the burdens placed on the Committee regarding workload, as with the workload in her Department, and that it will not be possible for the Committee to pick up that burden on its own, as the DUP justice spokesperson, I am sure that the Committee and its members will work with the Department and the Minister to try to get the best outcome possible and to ensure that we advance these issues. We will work, and we will certainly not be a burden or an obstacle when it comes to progressing these laws. We as a party commit to working in good faith with the Minister and the Department in trying to advance a lot of the amendments and any others that come up.”
“Each case will be judged on its individual merits and circumstances, but we will need to make sure that the laws that we pass here are applied correctly and consistently across the board. Some sort of review mechanism might be needed, where we can consider how effective the new disclosure application processes are. That might be something for the future as we look through the Bill. <BR /> <BR />I will go on to the Minister's utterances on Caoimhe's law and on character references.”
“I thank the Minister for that intervention, because it is very useful. What we do not want, and what we have to try to stop, is people's information about their private life being used to discredit them in some way and to humiliate them in other ways, thereby causing further trauma. That is what we are trying to defend against and get away from. Of course, we have to ensure that there is balance in the justice system and on the right to a fair and an appropriate trial for the accused. That is really important. As the Minister said, decisions will be taken by the judiciary, but we have to make sure that there is consistency of approach right across the various courts in the court system.”
“I thank the Minister for that intervention. Nevertheless, there are concerns that I want to address. The Minister and the departmental officials will know that, even from the range of questions that I have asked. We need to make sure that we get the balance correct. Nobody has been convicted or found guilty of an offence at that stage, so a defendant — the accused — must have all the tools at their disposal to ensure that they get a fair trial. It is important that we ensure that, amongst the safeguards that are in place, all exculpatory evidence is always disclosed. I do not know how to get the balance right, but we will have to put our minds to it to make sure that, with the new disclosure and application processes, all relevant evidence is in front of the people who make the decisions. <BR /> <BR />I will give way to the Minister.”
“There are other functions that can be utilised to have the court process as it should be. The court process should be adversarial and robust — that is how we do justice in this country — but there need to be special measures to protect victims and witnesses.”
“I will speak to part 2. It is important that we have special measures and that victims of sexual crime or crimes of a hostile nature will not have to be cross-examined by their alleged perpetrator. That can be an offence in itself, if you like, because of the trauma that the victim will have gone through. You can see how that would impede someone's coming forward and why somebody would not want to be in that position again. Victims will not want to be in the same room as the perpetrator. They do not want to see them across the street, so you can understand that they would not want to be in a big, stuffy courtroom with strangers asking them questions. We need to legislate for that. It is important that no one can be cross-examined by the perpetrator in that way.”
“<BR /> <BR />While it is in my head, I give my commitment as DUP justice spokesperson to working with the Minister and the Department to ensure that we produce the best possible legislation. I cite the work that we did in partnership in the Chamber and in Committee on the Justice Bill. We had eight days — over 40 hours — of debate during its Consideration Stage. It was really important that we had that, as it proves that the House can be effective at passing legislation. That is all the more important with this Bill, as it has victims and witnesses at its heart. I really do look forward, therefore, to working with the Department, the Minister and Committee members on it, as well, of course, with the House at Consideration Stage.”
“One can see from the wording and scope of those Bills that some of the clauses lean on one another. There has therefore been a step change as we have gone through first the Justice Bill, then the Criminal Justice (Sentencing etc) Bill and now the Victims and Witnesses of Crime Bill. That is really important. Credit where credit is due to the departmental officials. They got the sequencing right, as did the Minister. We had a very concentrated period in which to scrutinise the first two Bills, as we will with this Bill. I have criticised many things about the Justice Bill, but it was wise of the Minister to take the three steps that she did, and I commend her for doing so.”
“I thank the Minister for her intervention. She was absolutely right to take that action, as it means that victims' voices are right at the heart of the matters under discussion. It is now obvious to us that that should have been done years ago, but it is good that it is being done now. We should all be proud of the part that we are playing in producing such legislation. <BR /> <BR />Legislation is what it is. It is always there to protect the people, but it does not directly address them. Rather, it creates offences that people are then judged to have committed or not. The difference with this Bill, however, is that it places victims and witnesses at its heart. It complements the two other recent Bills from the Department of Justice, namely the Justice Bill and the Criminal Justice (Sentencing etc) Bill.”
“That person, fully resourced and supported, therefore needs to get right to the heart of governance and democracy in this place in order to advise the Government and promote the interests of victims and witnesses.”
“That in itself causes some victims and witnesses bother, because they are in a system that they are not part of, which means that they do not get the support that they require. That can sometimes leave them feeling retraumatised, as though they have been put through the wringer again. They have already had to cope with the crime that made them a victim, but they then have to go through a court process that retraumatises them because of their memories of everything that they went through. It is really difficult for them. We therefore need someone to be fully resourced and supported to promote victims and witnesses' interests. The Bill is designed not only to promote and support the interests of victims and witnesses but to promote an understanding of their rights and to raise awareness of matters relating to their interests.”
“She is dominant in that role at the minute, but, when we look at the Bill, we will have to consider the future, when Geraldine is not in position. That is why it is important that we have heard her voice throughout the work leading up to the Bill's introduction. It will do us good as legislators, as an Assembly and as a Committee to hear her voice when her opinions are sought. <BR /> <BR />There is no doubt that we need to do better for victims and, as are classified in most cases, witnesses.”
“We give the commitment that we will work with the Minister and departmental officials honestly and earnestly to make sure that the Bill is fit for purpose and as good as it can be. <BR /> <BR />I will now make remarks as an individual MLA and as justice spokesperson for the Democratic Unionist Party. First, I record my appreciation and acknowledgement of the work of the current Commissioner Designate for Victims of Crime, Geraldine Hanna. I have known Geraldine for some time. Like her, I am steeped in justice-related matters, especially around domestic violence. She was always a great attender of the all-party group on domestic and sexual violence, and she has carried that work forward into the commissioner's role. Geraldine is a champion for victims and witnesses.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Bill is another important piece of legislation for the people of this country. While it is clearly not as broad as the Justice Bill and is probably not as emotive to many as some of the Sentencing Bill's provisions, it nonetheless contains important protections and measures for victims and witnesses. It is hoped that, if they are in the unfortunate position of having to interact with the justice system, the Bill's provisions may support them through what can often be a difficult journey. <BR /> <BR />It will come as no surprise to Members that I really look forward to the scrutiny of the Bill. I know that my colleagues on the Committee also look forward to considering it in detail at Committee Stage, subject, of course, to its passing Second Stage today.”
“In the written and oral evidence received then, the Committee was advised of potential amendments that the Minister may table at Consideration Stage, including an amendment to remove the commissioner that is being considered in liaison with OLC. An amendment to suspend the commissioner could be tabled to align with work being undertaken by the Executive Office to look at having a consistent policy across Northern Ireland commissioners. We were also made aware that there may be other amendments on reporting obligations for bodies that work with the commissioner and on data-sharing in urgent or emergency situations. The Committee's role is to scrutinise the Bill as introduced. We will endeavour to consider any amendments that become apparent as the Bill progresses, although, obviously, the scope to do so in detail is somewhat limited.”
“Officials explained that the Bill would legislate on the disclosure regime not to prevent an application for disclosure but to set out a process whereby the defence would have to show the relevance of the information that it was requesting. That is an important protection. The House will be aware of the perception that a victim's sexual history or information about their private life can be used in court to discredit or, in some cases, humiliate them, causing further trauma. As a Committee, we will want to make sure that the provisions deliver on behalf of the victims whom it seeks to protect, balancing that with the accused's right to a fair trial. <BR /> <BR />As part of its scrutiny to date, the Committee received evidence from officials on Thursday 25 June, after the Bill's introduction.”
“Members asked how the strategy will impact on the work of the commissioner and vice versa. We also sought clarity on what the impact would be if the Bill did not gain Royal Assent during the mandate. Members heard that, should the Bill not pass, the commissioner would likely continue in designate status and would therefore function as they currently do. However, that could have an impact on other parts of the Bill, and, while interim measures could be put in place as mitigations, the overall strategy would be negatively affected. <BR /> <BR />Members also sought further information on the protections for victims of domestic abuse and sexual offences.”
“The Bill makes provision to offer those protections and provide clarity to victims that they do not have to face their perpetrator in court. <BR /> <BR />Members asked questions about a range of matters, including the independence of the office, the ability to review the performance of any future commissioner, the costs of establishing the office and the balance of the rights of victims or witnesses with those of the accused, who have not yet been found guilty of any crime. <BR /> <BR />When the Committee received an oral update from departmental officials on the victims and witnesses of crime strategy in February, members asked about the Bill, given the clear link between the two matters. We were advised that the Bill would be introduced in June and that work on the final drafting of the provisions was ongoing.”
“No doubt, all Members have spoken in the House about the need to better ensure that the voices of victims are heard and listened to in the justice system. <BR /> <BR />Officials also spoke about the hate crime provisions, advising that Judge Marrinan's review of hate crime had:”
“in the future. <BR /> <BR />In May 2025, the Committee considered a Department of Justice report on the outcome of its consultation on proposals to enhance the support and representation of victims and witnesses in the criminal justice system, which would inform the Victims and Witnesses of Crime Bill. In October 2025, we received a formal pre-legislative briefing from officials on the forthcoming Bill. The Committee heard that the Bill would provide the commissioner with the scope to develop their own strategic priorities, objectives, programme of work and anticipated outcomes. They will have the powers to work with other providers and bodies to ensure the best outcomes for victims and witnesses of crime. I think that we can all agree that that is a laudable aim.”
“The commissioner designate came to the Committee in October 2024 to give evidence on the victim survey, the results of which were published in September that year. During the session, the commissioner designate referenced what she viewed as "vital legislative changes" in the Bill that we are discussing. She acknowledged that there had been some concern that her wanting the legislation to progress may have presented a conflict of interest or made it seem that she had stepped outside her remit. She placed on record that she did not see any conflict of interest in her:”
“She also pointed out that it would mean adding to the number of amendments to the Justice Bill that were already planned, about which concerns had already been raised at that early stage. After the past few weeks, I think that we can all agree that not tabling a further amendment to that Bill was the right choice. <BR /> <BR />The Minister described the Victims' Commissioner as a "critical friend". The Committee has engaged with the commissioner designate on several occasions during the mandate and always found her evidence beneficial. We therefore look forward to scrutinising the process of making that office a statutory one and, hopefully, to continuing that engagement in the future.”
“In March 2024, when the Minister first briefed the Committee, she indicated that the Bill would be a hate crime and victims Bill and that it would be smaller than had been intended due to the reduced time available in the mandate. The Committee heard that a priority for the Bill would be to put the commissioner designate for victims and witnesses of crime on to a statutory footing. When the Minister was asked about the possibility of trying to make the change to place the commissioner on a statutory footing sooner, potentially via the Justice Bill, she advised of the work that needed to be done — for example, consulting on proposals and learning from other appointment processes — and said that she did not want to rush that process.”
“The Committee has a packed agenda as the end of the mandate approaches. Therefore, early and honest engagement is always welcome, especially when it relates to primary legislation, which is, after all, why we are here in the Chamber.”
“As Chairperson of the Committee for Justice, I welcome the opportunity to speak in the Second Stage debate on the Victims and Witnesses of Crime Bill. It is the last of the three Bills that, the Committee was advised, were to be introduced by the Minister in this shortened mandate. <BR /> <BR />There is little point in repeating what the Minister has just said regarding the content of the Bill. Should it pass its Second Stage, it will be referred to the Committee, and we will be able to go into the detail and scrutinise the provisions of the Bill at that stage. We have, in fact, already undertaken some pre-legislative scrutiny, and I start by thanking the Minister and her officials for that early engagement.”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. The position has turned out to be more positive than it was when I submitted the question. I know that this will not necessarily be your direct responsibility, Minister, but will any special measures be adopted to deal with the backlog of cases so that we can put victims right at the heart of the system again?”
“It was moved at the start of the debate on the group 6 amendments.”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. I asked the question because I fear that the backlog of work that has to be done on the A5, the Enniskillen bypass and everything that has been held up because of net zero policies will impact on all constituencies; I simply asked about North Antrim. Given that the Minister might not be able to spend a lot of capital money this year because of the hold-up in works, how will she negotiate the budget with her colleague the Finance Minister? Does she agree with her colleague that the Finance Minister's Budget is not adequate?”
“I thank the Health Minister for that answer. Can he tell us the scale of the issue? I am led to believe that it affected just under 50,000 letters. Can the Health Minister confirm that number?”
“If it takes seven days to iron things out, put the Bill through the ringer and scrutinise it properly, we will do that, and we will apologise to no one. We are here as legislators, and we will do that job.”
“She said that rule 90 of the Prison and Young Offenders Centre Rules (Northern Ireland) 1995 would be out of lockstep with the other laws, as it would need to be applied by the Equality Act 2010 in the same vein. <BR /> <BR />That concludes my winding-up speech, other than to say that I thank every person who took part in or listened to the debate. Nine groups of amendments have been debated over seven days. We have not finished yet; we will vote on those important issues. I record my gratitude to everyone who supported any amendments that I put my name to — I really appreciate it — and, of course, with the votes coming up next Tuesday, I would appreciate your support for the amendments that we as a party tabled and that I have put my name to. It would be much appreciated. <BR /> <BR />We are here to make law and to make good law.”
“The Minister stated that she is not the Scottish Minister and is not responsible for the Scottish law or guidance. She then talked about the Supreme Court judgement and said that she accepts the Supreme Court's opinion. She said, however, that she is responsible for the Justice Department in Northern Ireland and that that is not the case with the court opinions that have been formed in Scottish law and guidance over the past months. <BR /> <BR />On amendment No 97, the Minister was concerned that prisons might be out of lockstep with the rest of the bodies in Northern Ireland if they had to adhere to section 212(1) of the Equality Act 2010.”
“The Member has put his point on the record with that intervention. I cannot possibly speak on the Minister's behalf. If she wants to address that point, I will give way. If not, I will move on. <BR /> <BR />The Minister said that she had asked for the number of trans people in our prisons currently and in the past, but it could not be disclosed, as there was a danger that people could be identified because the number was so small. The Minister therefore cannot go into further detail in the House or anywhere else for that matter. In order to protect people's human rights and, of course, their safety, we do not want them to be identified. <BR /> <BR />The Equality Commission assisted and engaged with the Department of Justice in the production of the guidance, as it is constituted to do.”
“She went on to speak about the ending of remissions at that stage, what that meant and the pre-release support that other prisoners get. She addressed the issue of remand prisoners being released on bail and the work that the judiciary has been doing in that regard. I echo the Minister's sentiments on that. <BR /> <BR />The Minister went on to talk about amendment No 97. She did not support it. She said that it was not about which Member proposes an amendment but the detail of the amendment. She talked about the assessments and decisions that the Prison Service takes every day. She talked about its respect and diligence in keeping the prison population safe. She also talked up the Hydebank Wood establishment as a model of European standards.”
“He talked about Part X and rule 90, on which, of course, his amendment is based. He went on to speak about the law in Scotland. He stated that the Equality Commission hid behind article 2 of the Windsor framework and referred to the Dillon judgement, saying that it blows a hole in the Equality Commission's guidance. <BR /> <BR />The Minister of Justice spoke first on amendment No 96 and talked of the opportunities that it could lead to. She talked about engagement with the Department for Communities and how it would manage the pressure. She said that it was happy enough with that. The Minister addressed my point about extending the measure. She said that, while she has concerns, she is content to engage on the matter over the coming weeks in order to see whether it is possible.”
“Brian said that women-only protected spaces must be preserved and protected, and he referred to the situation that Scotland now finds itself in. Of course, he mentioned Lady Ross's opinion on that. <BR /> <BR />Timothy Gaston spoke to his amendment, of course. He said that it was steeped in biological reality, whilst those who oppose it are all about ideology. He went on to thank his North Antrim colleagues — Sian Mulholland and Jon Burrows — for their long-winded speeches, which meant that he had the opinion of Lady Ross to back up his amendment when we debated it today. I will pass that thanks on to Sian and Jon for their long-winded speeches. I feel the pain of the Member for North Antrim. <BR /> <BR />The Member spoke about the Prison and Young Offenders Centre Rules (Northern Ireland) 1995.”
“He noted that people in prison have the propensity to commit crime and that, when prisoners are confined to that space, they become vulnerable in their own right by virtue of that. He said that safety is a fundamental duty of the state and that, thanks to the Supreme Court opinion, which is so clear-cut, we should not need to wait for guidance from the Equality Commission. <BR /> <BR />Brian Kingston spoke on our amendment No 96, which is all about services and support. He said that we should assist those getting out of prison and that the amendment should lead to breaking the cycle of reoffending and re-imprisonment. We sincerely hope that that will manifestly show itself in the years to come. He stated that we would support amendment No 97, and I give that assurance and guarantee to its proposer.”
“They all said that they would not support amendment No 97, which is Timothy Gaston's amendment, and they outlined their arguments for that position. Nuala said that it did not make sense and was not about safety and that we should wait for the Equality Commission's guidance. <BR /> <BR />My North Antrim colleague Jon Burrows commended amendment No 96, which was tabled by my party. He talked at great length about amendment No 97 and how he supported it. He said that, when we deal with legislation, we need to deal in facts, not ideology. He said that, generally speaking, biological men are stronger and commit the most crimes, whereas, generally speaking, biological women are weaker and are the victims of most crimes.”
“I am starting to get somewhat worried that someone like me can produce an amendment that gets incorporated with the support of the entire House, but I will take it and bank it when I get it.”
“We will get the work done, and then we can go home to our families. <BR /> <BR />Sinéad McLaughlin, Emma Sheerin and Nuala McAllister all spoke in support of amendment No 96: the DUP's amendment to avoid the release of prisoners on a Friday. I thank you very much for that support. I really do. Some did not really speak much on it, but Sinéad went into her experiences with the bail hostel in her constituency close to her office. She also talked about the support that was needed and the dignity that was required for people getting out of prison. Emma Sheerin also said that she would support amendment No 96, as did Nuala McAllister. I thank them for that support; my gratitude is genuinely heartfelt that we will get support for that amendment from right across the House.”
“<BR /> <BR />I will now go into some of the Members' contributions, but I will not be long, so we will not have to break for dinner —”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I will start off in that trend and mode of thought by thanking again the Committee Clerk and staff for their diligence and work in supporting the Committee members over the past year and a half. I also thank the Assembly's Bill Office for all its work over that period. I do believe that its staff were overworked, but they were able to step up very well and cope with all the demands that the members placed on them. Indeed, Mr Deputy Speaker, the Minister beat me by a couple of minutes: I wanted to thank you and all the Speakers who have led on the debate, given guidance during the debate and kept us all in check, albeit some needed more checking than others. I also thank the Speaker's Office and everyone who supports the Speakers in that regard.”
“I thank the Minister for that answer and acknowledge the success of the baby loss certificate scheme so far. The numbers show that the scheme was warranted and needed in the first place. That is welcome news. <BR /> <BR />Has the Minister put in place some sort of review of the certificate scheme and applications to it so that we will know in a week's time, a month's time or six months' time whether it is working as it should be?”
“That ruling, from a judge at the highest level, should be accepted as a common-sense opinion on sex segregation in prisons not only in Scotland, even though there are differences in policy. It is a common-sense determination that means that sex segregation in prisons is and should be only according to biological sex. For that reason, we will support amendment No 97. <BR /> <BR />Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank you for your indulgence, as I know that my contribution went a bit over time, but such issues are really important to raise. I thank Members for listening to me speak to the final group of amendments tonight.”