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 20 of 75.
“Yes, I do agree, for one simple reason: when you speak to the police commanders and officers, no matter in what guise, whether through the district policing partnerships, as they were known in my time, or the policing and community safety partnerships, they always talk about going to the market and to the place where they believe that criminals are active or where a police presence is needed. I cannot think of anywhere more important than at a festival. There should be a police presence at that festival to investigate, detect and remove drugs. <BR /> <BR />Let us be under no illusion: the people who the criminal justice system should target are the drug dealers.”
“I suppose that it is important that that message gets out there, but there are so many people in my community who thought that that was irresponsible, because those are words that you would imagine a drug addict using to advise a fellow drug addict on how to take drugs. That may well be something that they would say to a fellow addict. There is a very fine balance, and I am not sure that the PHA got it right. It caused a lot of alarm in my community. It illustrated to the public out there that, in some quarters of governance, there is nearly an admission of defeat when it comes to law enforcement addressing drug taking and drug abuse.”
“There was a wee bit of uproar in my constituency a number of weeks ago when the Public Health Agency (PHA) put out its drug-taking advice. In one way, I can understand why the PHA felt that it needed to offer that advice. It used the words:”
“We also thought it important to build on the motion. I appreciate the kind words from the proposer of the motion about what we have done to add to the motion through our amendment. The first line of the amendment changes the motion to make it read that the Assembly:”
“<BR /> <BR />We in the DUP think that the issue is so important that we had it in our manifesto:”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, for allowing that time. I applaud the proposers of the motion on drug-testing schemes. <BR /> <BR />This is a vital issue that affects so many families and puts families into absolute despair. Families are in despair when are dealing with addiction; families are in despair when they get involved in the criminal justice system; families are in despair when they are involved in health emergencies; and families are in absolute despair when they lose a loved one. We all know someone who has been affected in some way by drug abuse, so it is really important that the Assembly and the Executive tackle this very important and critical issue. We should be here to save lives, and this is one topic on which we could do something good.”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. Is he able to outline anything in particular from the findings in relation to the use of toilets? Do those reflect the common sense of Northern Ireland people?”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I really appreciate that. <BR /> <BR />Can the Minister explain how the Bill will affect domestic property, privately owned property and commercial and business property?”
“Yes, we give data to private organisations, but they cannot compel us to do so. We have a choice. Only the Government of the day can pass laws to control people's lives and use the digital ID —”
“The Government could easily change the scope of and conditions in every sphere of life, and we would have no say in it and no choice but to comply. <BR /> <BR />Members may say, "It couldn't happen like that in a civilised country", to which I reply, "Look at Canada". There, the protesting truckers and everyone who supported or funded them had their bank accounts blocked, because Trudeau did not like their opinions. The first question in the debate should be this: why is the state making it mandatory? The state should not force people to do anything that could put them and their private information in jeopardy. I hear Members say, "But I have a digital wallet for all sorts of services on my phone. I hand over personal information all the time, and it makes my life so handy".”
“Over 70 million people do not need to be given a digital ID to stop 0·05% of that number arriving illegally. We already have a visa system through which people's right to work is displayed, but it is not enforced. If employers do not check visas, why would they check a digital ID card? <BR /> <BR />A digital form of ID is not a harmless card in your hip pocket that can be shown to a person in authority. The British people have balked at such a proposition even in the worst of times. Such measures can and have been used, even in recent history, to coerce people into a position that they did not wish to be in. They enable the Government to widen the scope to cover all other matters and to control what people can and cannot do. That is what vaccine certification did during the pandemic.”
“I have no doubt that, if the scheme is wrong for Northern Ireland, it is wrong for the rest of the United Kingdom. Everyone who speaks on the subject should say so and defend the United Kingdom from this potential tragedy. <BR /> <BR />The scheme is a so-called solution that is trying to find a problem, and the Government just happen to have selected the number-one issue that has been vexing so many British minds of late. Do not be fooled: illegal immigration and illegal working are totally unacceptable, and the issues need to be resolved immediately. They need to be resolved across the UK, including Northern Ireland, but the scheme will not do that. It is not even designed to do so. This is state overreach, and, as is always the case, it is about making people millionaires.”
“Some people know the truth, but people cannot get justice because of the on-the-run letters and the fact that the Irish Government will not investigate their part in the terrorist campaign. That is truly awful. My party will always defend every innocent victim, no matter where they come from, what their religion, where they went to school or where they serve their God. We will support them all. I wish that every other party in this place could say the same. <BR /> <BR />I turn to the Alliance Party, which is going to support Sinn Féin's amendment. That is diabolical. I ask it to search its conscience and read the text of the DUP motion. I pray that it sees the light when it comes to our wording, comes back and runs round to support us in our endeavour, because we have the victims at the heart of the process.”
“That is what the IRA did to the people of Northern Ireland from all religions, including Protestant and Catholic. So many people cannot move on because they have not seen truth and justice. That is what they want. <BR /> <BR />We talk about transparency from the British and Irish Governments, but where is the disclosure from the IRA and loyalist terrorists? Where is the disclosure from Sinn Féin members who were in the IRA? They are bound by some code. That is some code indeed for the victims of terrorism when they cannot get the truth from politicians in this country who had a history in the IRA but will not speak up and deliver that truth for those people when it would be so easy for them to do so. Search your conscience. People out there have been living in hell because they cannot get the truth.”
“I thank the Member for his clarification. <BR /> <BR />Then we have Sinn Féin Members, who want to amend the motion to take out the word "innocent". Does removing that word from the victims not resonate and perpetuate the guilt? That is shabby. It is really, really bad. Sinn Féin has campaigned vigorously for amnesty, which is the opposite of justice. How can it say out of one side of its mouth that it seeks justice and truth while lobbying from the other for amnesty for IRA terrorists who perpetrated murder and killed people at the border in Northern Ireland, including Protestants at that border and Catholics who they suspected of informing? Without any trial or a justice process, those people were summarily executed at the side of the road.”
“Why can the House not support that wording, in a motion that seeks truth and justice for victims and survivors? Why can it not? Why will the House divide, when the victims and survivors need truth and justice and need the House to fight for them? They have waited long enough. They have waited for decades and generations. People have died not knowing the truth and not seeing justice applied to the perpetrators and the people who killed and savagely murdered their loved ones, yet some Members here think that the motion is unhelpful and want to move on. They want to forget. The SDLP Member talked about the failure of moving on from the "poison" of the past. Well, I can tell you now that the innocent victims who died at the hand of terrorism did not spread any poison.”
“I will point everyone again to the motion, which refers to:”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I agree with her when she talks about transparency between the Governments — our UK Government and that of the Irish Republic — but what about the terrorists? What about disclosure for the victims of terrorism? What about the political parties attached to terrorists, like Sinn Féin?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Will she agree that it would be wrong to target a young individual, male or female, from Derry who is a member of the armed forces?”
“I extend goodwill to the Minister in bringing forward her legislation. I want to see good legislation as much as she does, but my party will scrutinise every line, clause and measure in her Bills to ensure that the powers that we grant are appropriate and right to protect our people.”
“It is not fair that victims must sit for years before they have their day in court or at least see that the perpetrator who made them a victim has been through court and punished sufficiently. It is not fair that those people have to wait years for that.”
“<BR /> <BR />I go back to the point that our law enforcement agencies and court system need to be fully resourced to combat all crime in this day and age. It is vital that the people who keep us safe have the money and means to do so and that justice is not delayed when a crime is committed and investigated and when it goes to the PPS and through our court system.”
“A lady was incarcerated. Others have incited violence on the streets, but, because they did not admit guilt, they were allowed to say things without any punishment. I really worry that we have a Labour Government in power who are bringing in laws that are quite draconian in nature. The SDLP is Labour's sister party, and maybe it could speak for Labour. Maybe the SDLP is as concerned as I am. At times, the Alliance Party, with its liberalism, can be quite intolerant of other people's views, and I really worry. I hope that the Minister will bring forward the sentencing Bill, and I hope that the measures in it will do the job of protecting people no matter their race, religion, disability, sexuality, gender or age, because that is critical.”
“I agree with the Member. That is why I think that we will be pushing for a more substantial burden of proof to be established in law that requires evidence of the existence of direct prejudice or hatred at the time of the offence and that that was the primary motive of the crime. I think that it is realistic and sensible to put that safeguard in the legislation. <BR /> <BR />Any new legal definition should not weaken the rights of those with deeply held legitimate religious views, or any other views for that matter, to express opinions that may be contrary to the views of those advocating for protected groups. What I mean by that and why I am worried and nervous about that is that we have seen Labour produce the Online Safety Act, which has resulted in people being incarcerated for tweets. Horrendous as they were, they were text.”
“They were born here in Northern Ireland. Then a newcomer family was attacked, and they perceived it to be a hate crime. They thought that they were attacked because they were a newcomer family, but that was not the case. So, there are real worries about the only parameter being the perception of the victim. They could be misinformed, and so, then, could the police be, about the motives for criminal activity. That is vital.”
“I thank the Minister for her intervention. There is a world of difference between an amendment to a Bill from the Department and the Minister bringing 50% of her Bill through amendments at Committee Stage to Further Consideration Stage and also amending all the previous text at Second Reading. That is really worrying when it comes to the Justice Bill. <BR /> <BR />There is also an issue with how we perceive an aggravated hate crime, even through the sentencing Bill, because the victim alone can perceive it to be a hate crime. There have been many instances of that. In fact, there was one that I had to deal with through constituency work where people threw eggs out of a car at three victims. The first victim did not report it. They were born here in Northern Ireland. The second victim did not report it.”
“I hope that the Minister can give me that reassurance today. <BR /> <BR />I also have an issue —”
“I thank the Minister for that intervention, because it actually does do that. We would not be on the same page as the leader of the Opposition on stand-alone hate crime legislation. That is why, I think, the Minister is taking a good route. My worry about the legislation that is coming forward is that it is rushed or botched. What do we have as an example? We have the Justice Bill, where the Minister brought only half a Bill, and, on the half that she did bring, she is now seeking amendments. Therefore, we worry that the sentencing Bill may well turn out the same way. I ask the Minister to make sure and to assure us that, in her bringing forward the sentencing Bill in haste, it is fully covered and all content and clauses are before the Assembly at First Reading and Second Reading.”
“Absolutely, and I thank the Member for raising that. As a party, we condemn all sectarian/racist attacks on individuals and their homes. There are absolutely no circumstances in which such actions and threats of violence or intimidation are justified. That also goes for race, religion, disability, sexuality, gender or age. It is all totally unacceptable. No one should be threatened or attacked for those issues. We have always been clear —.”
“That blurs the lines for me — it really does — because I do not think that to hate something is actually a crime. I hate all sorts of things. I hate crime. I hate violence against women and girls. I hate terrorism. I hate the measures that were brought in during COVID that caused so much pain and suffering to our people. I hate all those things. That is not a crime, so "hate crime" in itself is a bit of a misnomer.”
“Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker. We think that our amendment assists and strengthens the motion and places focus where it should be, which is on providing additional resources to the Northern Ireland Courts and Tribunals Service; the PSNI, which investigates and fights crime; and the tackling paramilitarism, criminality and organised crime programme that is meant to tackle the spectre and leftovers of the paramilitary world, which the leader of the Opposition just talked about. Those are the areas where, we believe, more resource should be placed in order to fight crime. <BR /> <BR />When it come to fighting crime, what is a crime? I have always had a discomfort with regard to the phrase "hate crime", because we know that a lot of the incidents that the police are obliged to report are not necessarily a crime.”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. Wrightbus is the largest employer in my constituency and is in the top 10 employers in Northern Ireland. It is ahead of its field in research and development by some margin. Will the Minister commit to applying pressure on the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland to make sure that nothing in the UK unfairly disadvantages Wrightbus compared with its domestic competitors? If I write to the Minister, will she visit Wrightbus to hear first hand from the CEO?”
“I call on the Finance Minister to make that a main priority during his tenure. Let us show the people of Northern Ireland that we value and believe in them and that they are worth it. <BR /> <BR />What makes this country great is its people. Let us ensure that our people get the remuneration and conditions that they deserve. I ask and plead with the Finance Minister to look at the pay awards for this year. Let us get on with it. Let us remunerate our people for the valuable jobs that they do in providing for all our people, teaching our children, looking after our elderly and keeping us safe.”
“That is why the DUP wants to see a fair and complementary pay award that is relative to the rest of the UK. Pay parity must be the goal.”
“It will be our people who will implement any and all of the Executive's initiatives that come forward now and in the future. If we truly want to make Northern Ireland work, and if we truly want to make it an attractive place to live and work, we have to do more to invest in our people. We have to do that by providing them with opportunities to grow businesses and have that entrepreneurial spirit but also by ensuring that those who go into professions — noble professions — and work for the state to provide services for us, are properly remunerated and valued. <BR /> <BR />We need to invest in all our people, be that our healthcare staff who look after our elderly and vulnerable, our teachers who encourage our children to learn or our police officers who keep us safe.”
“I heard what Nuala McAllister said earlier, and I echo her comments about the Hillsborough law. It was a good day when that law was published. However, I will not leave things to chance or to the Labour Government, or even our own Health Minister. That is why I take the opportunity to raise my consultation on an individual duty of candour that will not only bring openness and transparency to our healthcare settings but will set up a new reporting regime, with independent eyes and greater protection for whistle-blowers. <BR /> <BR />There is no doubt that the Executive are facing a number of challenges and issues that need to be resolved. Those challenges are extremely difficult, but that is what we are in politics for, is it not?”
“One real, tangible way of delivering for our people and host communities and for newcomers is to put together a multi-agency task force in each area that includes not only all the Departments in the Executive that have a role to play and all the local government agencies that have a role on the ground but the NIO and the Home Office, which is responsible for immigration. That is our only way of being able to put support and resource on the ground to ensure that the violence that we experienced will never happen again.”
“The bodies that make up the membership of the community safety strategic delivery board include the Department of Justice, the Police Service of Northern Ireland, the Education Authority, the Northern Ireland Housing Executive, the Probation Board for Northern Ireland, the Youth Justice Agency, the Northern Ireland Policing Board, the Executive Office, the Department for Communities, the Northern Ireland Office, the Department of Health and the Society of Local Authority Chief Executives (SOLACE). <BR /> <BR />I will make the point that I have been echoing since the violence erupted in Northern Ireland in the summer.”
“I have no doubt that the Minister for Communities will be able to do so and provide that assurance to the House and to the mover of the motion, but there has been a missed opportunity. The motion could have called on the Executive to work better together through the community safety framework. Typing "community safety framework" in a search takes you to two Departments: the Department for Communities and the Department of Justice. There, you can clearly see that the purpose of the community safety framework is:”
“That is why it has been put in the Programme for Government, one priority of which is "Safer Communities". Because it is in the Programme for Government, there is no doubt that dealing with it is a multi-agency and multi-departmental issue. <BR /> <BR />I will be critical of the motion, because the Alliance Party had a big opportunity with it, given the role that the Justice Department has to play in the community safety framework. The motion refers to the community safety framework. It asks the Minister for Communities:”
“I thank Kellie Armstrong, the Member from Alliance who moved the motion. I listened intently to her speech. I must say that I agreed with the vast majority of it. I thank her for the tone in which she opened the debate, because this is an opportunity for us to unite as an Assembly to condemn violence, specifically the sectarian and racist attacks on individuals and their homes. <BR /> <BR />My constituency has also borne the brunt of some really atrocious attacks in the past number of months. At that time, I felt that, when people talked in generalisms, it did a great disservice to working-class areas and our host communities on the underlying issues that they face. I felt aggrieved about the generalisation of some of the concerns that people were intimating to the media and to me at that time. It is a complicated and multifaceted issue.”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. Given her comment on responsibility around freedom of speech and while I defend her right to have said it, does she regret calling a past Chairperson of the Justice Committee "male, stale and pale"? Will she apologise to the House? Is the Minister considering anything that would erode freedom of expression and speech in any of her proposed Bills?”
“That strength will go right across this land, and those young, Christian, conservative people will no longer be scared to speak up. They will be like Charlie Kirk, and that will be his lasting legacy.”
“There are many people who had never heard of him but aspired to the same values. Those people now know Charlie Kirk. They know what he stood for and what his family stands for. They know what his organisation stands for. A fire and a passion have been ignited that will grip this world. It will grip America and the UK. Charlie Kirk's legacy will be stronger in death than it was in life. <BR /> <BR />I am part of a Christian hillwalking club, and we were out in the Highlands at the weekend. The club has young and old members, but Charlie Kirk was the topic of everybody's conversation. There was deep sadness and shock that Charlie Kirk is no longer with us. I recognised the burning passion in those young people's lives for Charlie Kirk and his strength.”
“Charlie Kirk was a champion. He was a tremendous speaker and a talented debater. First and foremost, however, he was a family man: a father of two young children. He was brutally assassinated because he was effective and because he spoke the truth. He warned against intolerant liberalism and the totalitarian left, but he preached libertarianism. He fought for freedom. He supported family: everybody's family. He talked about his Lord, and now Charlie is in glory. He leaves behind a grieving wife and two young children, however, and that is intolerable. I will continue to pray for that family. <BR /> <BR />We sometimes think that America is so far away, but it is not. The battles that Americans fight we fight also. Surely the past five years have taught us that. Charlie Kirk was a champion to so many people throughout the world.”
“Will the Member clarify that remark? Is he saying that any companies that produce weapons in Northern Ireland should not get government support or funding?”
“They should never have been held in captivity, yet they have been held for months and months and months. Hamas will not even release dead bodies. Hamas could end this war tomorrow if it showed that commitment to release hostages, but it chooses not to. Sinn Féin chooses to ignore that very important piece of information, so I plead today that the House recognise the hurt that Hamas has caused not only in the state of Israel but for its own people.”
“Yes, I can. I can very clearly state that starvation should not be used as an action of war. That is repulsive to me as someone who served in the Royal Irish. I could never abide by that under the Geneva Convention. My colleague Doug Beattie has raised that issue time and time again. It is really important that state forces, from any state, abide by the Geneva Convention, and, if they lapse from or breach that convention, they should be investigated, and people should be put on trial. That should be the case, and we have always been consistent on that. However, Sinn Féin will ignore and, in fact, cheerlead, at times, the actions of Hamas. If Hamas yearned for peace, it could release all the hostages that it holds today. Where is Sinn Féin calling for the release of hostages today, yesterday, the month before?”
“I will say it again: we have always condemned Israeli state actions that fall short of any convention or any humanitarian law. That is the thing about this party and about others. We have consistently tabled amendments, and we supported the Ulster Unionist Party amendment the last time, which was a balance. The UUP will say that the amendment that it has tabled today offers a balance. We do not necessarily agree with that sentiment, but that party has tried, whereas no effort is being made by Sinn Féin to be balanced in this regard. Therefore, when Sinn Féin utters words on Gaza, that is propaganda. It can be nothing but propaganda because it is not balanced. It is propaganda.”
“<BR /> <BR />War is hell, and the people who are most affected by war are innocent civilians. Does history not teach us that a consequence of war is famine? Members on these Benches and from all parties on this side of the House have always been consistent in condemning actions by the Israeli state whenever they needed to be condemned. We do so again today. However, I have never heard Sinn Féin condemn Hamas. It is Hamas that has had its jackboot on the Palestinian people for years and years, and it is Hamas that will be the barrier to a two-state solution in the region, because, if there were to be a two-state solution tomorrow, the Palestinian people would be locked into a constant Hamas regime that would do them down.”