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 49 of 75.
“Although I welcome the amendments, that troubles me. There are still queries in my head around some of those things. That was amendment No 8.”
“who is that senior officer? Is it the permanent secretary or someone else? If that amendment gives them the power to terminate an appointment, what capacity do they have to investigate that action? What powers will the Department of Finance and that senior officer have in investigating and in the disciplinary element of that action? How will they satisfy themselves that a person did not have regard for the code?”
“It is important to say that it is the code of appointment and not the code of conduct, but I cannot help but think that a spad, whomever they might be and no matter what party they are from, could well be made redundant not because of their sins but because of an appointment process that may have been flawed. That is the first thing that I will say about amendment No 8. <BR /> <BR />If we are giving a special or a new power to, as amendment No 8 says:”
“and it is to do with the appointments process. <BR /> <BR />That leads me on to amendment No 8. Whilst I understand and welcome that most of the Minister's amendments are about putting the meat on the bones and putting in the detail so that Ministers, spads, the Civil Service and everyone else, for that matter, know exactly where they stand, I have a concern with amendment No 8. This might be for the first time, although I do not know, but the amendment gives a "senior officer" in the Department of Finance the power to, if you like, make null and void the appointment of a spad because of an issue to do with the code of appointment.”
“Amendment No 5, which is to clause 1, says:”
“Yes, I will, Mr Deputy Speaker. When I look at the amendments and the amendments from the Finance Minister, I recall that reform should be led by the Executive, but here we have a Minister being forced to bring reform through a private Member's Bill. That is not good enough. I want to see reform coming out of this Executive and this Finance Minister. Of course, we live in challenging times for health and the economy, but those challenging times should not be an excuse not to reform. They should be the catalyst for and the reason why we need reform. We cannot simply keep doing what we are doing over and over again. It will fail our people, and it is failing our people. <BR /> <BR />Most of the Minister's amendments are stylistic and tidy up wording. That is to be commended, but I have a concern about and a question mark over some.”
“The Member makes an intervention, but he neglects to look at his own party and his side of the House with regards to bad behaviour. That is not acceptable. That is the attitude that we have seen from Sinn Féin throughout this process. It is not acceptable, it is not good and it is not conducive to good law. I ask the Member to consider his ways and to engage fully in reform. <BR /> <BR />Why do we need this reform? It is not even because of the RHI inquiry or any other inquiry. Reform is a good thing. Reform is something that we should think about on a daily basis when we ask this: what can we do better? The Bill goes some way, although it is a small way and a small step to doing that.”
“Why are we here, if not to transform the lives of our people? The lives of our people —.”
“It is disappointing that the Department and the Minister have come, at this late hour, with these amendments for us to discuss today, albeit that I welcome them. This needed to happen. The Minister needed to table these amendments so that we can have a good, thorough debate and the Department can stamp its thoughts on the process. That is the way that it should be. It could have been done earlier; it could have been done by that political party earlier. <BR /> <BR />I must say that I was disappointed when Sinn Féin members turned their face away from the Bill. They did not want to know it; they did not want to engage, and that was deeply disappointing. This is reform. Why are we as MLAs here if not to reform? What are we here for if not to reform the practices and processes that we encounter daily in order to make those easier and better?”
“Whilst I accept that any Member may reserve the right, and I will protect the right, not to endorse any direction of travel via legislation, it is incumbent on us all to engage in that process to make sure that legislation is fit for purpose and that it is exactly what we need it to be when it goes out the other side. <BR /> <BR />Whilst I acknowledge the Minister and the Department's will to lay down amendments now, that process could have been started a lot sooner, even by his political party in the Committee that scrutinised the Bill. All the amendments that the Minister has brought forward could have been discussed during the earlier stages of scrutiny that the Finance Committee endeavoured to provide throughout this process.”
“I answer: yes, absolutely. I do not see why other Members criticise Members for bringing forward a private Member's Bill. In fact, I want to encourage Members to bring forward what is in their head, their ideas and their interests, and I see want to see those in blue Bills. Then let the Committee scrutinise and let the Assembly decide what should and should not go forward. <BR /> <BR />In that context, I must say that I am disappointed by the attitude of some parties and Members of the House. Whilst it is entirely appropriate for the Minister to reserve the right not to endorse the Bill, it is not appropriate to dampen down any Member who wishes to introduce private legislation. It is not appropriate for a party not to engage in a decision-making journey and process that could well lead to legislation.”
“I have thoroughly enjoyed the process and journey to this stage of the Bill because I enjoy my Committee work. I enjoy building up relationships with other members from other parties. It is the one chance that you really get to build up relationships with those people, outside party politics, because you have a common goal and a common job to do, and you should, as a necessity, apply all your professional will to that. <BR /> <BR />I welcome legislation coming to the House so that we can all debate it and make sure that it is the best that it can be. What I see in the Bill is, simply, reform. What I see in the Bill, irrespective of who introduced it, who the author is and who moved it, is reform. I ask myself this simple question: is the reform necessary? I answer: absolutely. Is this the right approach and the right way to go?”
“Radical thought seems to be non-existent in this Budget. In a time of great challenge, we seem to be doing the same thing over and over again, so will the Minister ensure that the final Budget will contain sufficient revenue allocations to promote economic recovery when the Executive allow businesses to open and trade freely? <BR /> <BR />The two Departments that seem to be hit hardest in this time of challenge are Health and Education. Will the Minister give a commitment to the House that he will look seriously at RRI borrowing for Health and Education?”
“That takes courage from someone who does not know this environment or how a Committee works. For a victim of domestic violence to come forward with information that is grievous even to their soul and to have to recite that to members whom they have never met, that is enormous, but they did that; they completed that. I hope that the people who put in that courageous effort will see fruit at the end of this and get some peace, happiness and even safety from the Bill. <BR /> <BR />Again, I thank everyone involved in the process. I am greatly joyed that this may well be the first Bill to come out the other side of this journey. So be it, because we have been waiting so long for all that I spoke about earlier. Let us look forward to the practical implementation of this law and make sure that victims are at the centre of it.”
“<BR /> <BR />Most of all, we have to thank the victims who have had the courage to step up and speak to us — the Committee — which, for them, means officialdom. They then perhaps had to speak to the Department and the Minister herself.”
“The debate has been robust, and that is the way that it should be, because, at the end of the day, we have to think about the victims, and not ourselves, our standing or our pride. It is about the victims. <BR /> <BR />I also commend all the support groups and their personnel. There are too many to mention, although some Members have tried. They have worked night and day. I can remember getting text messages at 2.30 am from people commending aspects of speeches and amendments tabled. Even last week, people in those groups were telling me that this has been an emotional roller coaster for them, because they see the damage that is done daily. On the other side, they see the good that could be done with legislation. They have waited for and craved the legislation for so long, and it is almost within their grasp.”
“I do not say that just because I sit on the Justice Committee. I really enjoy the Justice Committee. I have built up relationships with all members of that Committee to a very high standard of productivity and respect. I respect all members of the Committee. We work well together as a team. That is the real politics that we should be endeavouring to produce. <BR /> <BR />I also thank the Assembly staff, plenary staff and, of course, the Speaker and the Deputy Speakers, all of whom have been through this. I was told off a number of times at various stages of the Bill. That is run of the mill for me. To be fair, I would not want it to be any other way, because it is all about robustness, debate and making sure that the Bill is forged in fire, both in this place and at the Committee.”
“She has done very well by the Department, constantly engaging proactively with the Committee and the all-party working group. Departments work only as effectively and efficiently as the people who populate them. I say this to the Minister, through you, Mr Deputy Speaker: you definitely have a good one there. <BR /> <BR />The Committee staff must also be commended for the work that they have done over the past number of months. There were multiple meetings every week, for many weeks. That is no mean feat when you are trying to prepare packs and when everything is sometimes moving very quickly. A lot of care and attention was given from September, as it was throughout the summer recess after we had started Committee Stage. Committees will work only as effectively as the staff who populate them and the goodwill of their members.”
“That is all for the future, and I hope that we get the opportunity to address those issues. It might not be in this term, and it might be with a new suite of people on the Justice Committee and a new suite of Members, but the marker has now been laid down. This is from where the Assembly, the Committee, the Minister and the Department step off in order to make sure that there is real change and that the next steps are taken. <BR /> <BR />There are so many people to thank for their work on the Bill, not least the Minister, the previous Ministers, as the Minister said in her speech, and the Department. One name has been bandied about in today's debate — I mentioned her at Second Stage — as someone who has been very proactive. I will not embarrass her by naming her, but we all know who she is.”
“The last thing that we want is for anybody — any of the law enforcement agencies or the organisations involved in the court procedures — to forego any of the Bill's clauses to the point that the law is ignored or not implemented correctly. That would be a travesty, as it would be letting down the victims of domestic abuse. It would not be comprehended and cannot happen. We therefore need to consider carefully the implementation of the Bill, its reporting and the ascertaining of its effectiveness. All of that has to be done. We all have to be informed. <BR /> <BR />We also have to look at our next steps. What do we do around non-fatal strangulation, the rough-sex defence, parental alienation and legal aid? How do we grapple with those issues? How do we get out the other side in a positive way?”
“When one speaks to victims about what they and their families, parents and children have gone through for years, it is scary. I have only dipped into that world in scrutinising the legislation. I do not live it. Dear help anyone and everyone who does live it. If we can make a small positive difference to their lives, make things easier and give them the strength and confidence to move forward, surely it has all been worth it. They can seek and get hope from the Bill and the agreements and compromises that we have reached in order to achieve the Domestic Abuse and Civil Proceedings Bill. <BR /> <BR />I emphasise that that will depend on its implementation.”
“However, again, the proof will be in the practical outworking of the legislation, seeing how that manifests itself and how we can protect people against those specific aspects of domestic violence, sexual violence and coercive control. I will wait to see how that rolls out. <BR /> <BR />That is why it is so important that there is oversight of the implementation and frequent reporting of the roll-out of this law. That will inform us better than anything else on what we need to do and the next steps that we must take to ensure that we not only protect victims but try to eradicate that massively evil pursuit and activity. When one delves into that subject and sees what people have gone though, my goodness, it is chilling. It really is chilling.”
“It has been made only too clear by the people to whom we have spoken — support groups and victims — that that whole aspect of legal aid cannot continue. The way in which it manifests itself in victims' lives has to be resolved. We must somehow grapple with that issue. I am glad that we have the report on the legal aid aspect because the Minister will be able to push on with that vital work. I will be there to support that every step of the way. <BR /> <BR />As I said, we have, for the first time, encapsulated coercive control in a Bill. I would like to have seen some aspects in the Bill. I understand why I could not introduce such aspects as non-fatal strangulation, tackling the rough sex defence and parental alienation, as my colleague Doug Beattie mentioned. I realise that those aspects are threaded through the Bill.”
“It is a credit to the members and staff of the Committee for working through, compromising, seeing what could work and then tabling the amendments. That is very good. <BR /> <BR />There were a couple of battle zones in the Bill. One that came to the fore was, of course, legal aid. I believe that what the member Miss Rachel Woods was trying to achieve with regard to the waiver was a suitable and honourable compromise, taking on a mighty subject piece by piece. Credit is due and must be given to her for taking that on and trying to make positive change to a monster issue. What that did was to open a bigger battle front than the Bill could ever contain or envelop. It is one that, I think, we will pick up and run with from here on because there must be change.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is incredibly important that we keep an eye on this law, and that is why it is very important that training and reporting are in the Bill. Those are vital going forward. Some legislators in some jurisdictions have had more than one go at legislation like this, and it may be the case that we need more than one go. That remains to be seen, and we hope that we do not need it, but we may well. It was very important to get all that into the Bill. <BR /> <BR />I am glad that the Committee was able to collectively work through those issues. It is not often the case that you get to a point where you can move Committee amendments. Sometimes you see a raft of amendments from individual Committee members. However, it not all that common to get a raft of Committee amendments.”
“There was a lot of brainstorming and gnashing of teeth along the way, but I think that we have got to the best possible position with the Bill. There were a number of naysayers not at the very start of this legislative journey but when we started to talk about how to capture coercive control in a Bill. A lot of people thought that it could not be completed or done. The proof of the pudding will be in the eating; the proof will be in the actual practical outworking of the Bill. We have produced the Bill; nothing more. We have produced legislation, albeit that that is a very positive and great achievement. However, it is the practical outworking of the legislation that will make the difference to people's life.”
“We were working, and not only were we working but the support groups for domestic and sexual violence were working. They were working even harder because we were not able to support them. <BR /> <BR />Of course, all-party working groups continued to do their work even when this place was not functioning. I commend and thank all those groups for working through the lean years, for never giving up and for keeping on pushing and prodding in order to help produce and shape the Bill, which will change people's life in a positive way. <BR /> <BR />For the first time, we have tried to capture coercive control in legislation. That is no mean feat, and it is really a hard task that we have now, hopefully, achieved.”
“I mean all our people, no matter where they go to worship or to be schooled. It is all our people who benefit from legislative change, and I will defend that. <BR /> <BR />There is no good reason whatsoever why this place cannot function. Sometimes it does not function well. We all know and see that. Sometimes it functions very well, and that has to continue. The only way that it can continue is if all the parties give it life so that politicians like me and others can do the work in Committees and the Chamber to bring real, effective change to our people's life. I can go out in my constituency to help a family or a hundred families a week. However, if I want to make a positive, widespread change, I have to do it here. I have to do it through these blue Bills, and that is how I do it. We were deprived of that for far too long.”
“One thing that I have learned as I have come back into this arena is that I do not necessarily value the debates in this place but that I very much value passing legislation through all its various stages. I will defend that to the hilt, but, more than that, it is about the work we do in our Committees, building relationships between members of rival parties and building the capacity and knowledge that you can get only by reading a Committee pack on a weekly basis. We were deprived of those in those three years. We were deprived of that knowledge, expertise and capacity to build. When it comes to passing Bills, it is that capacity and knowledge that are so important to making sure that we get the right legislation in order to effect positive change for our people.”
“We were working away, making a positive difference to the lives of hundreds of families a week. What we were being prevented from doing was the work that achieves legislation and that builds relationships between MLAs in our Committees, and we are a far poorer place because of that.”
“I support the Bill. It is good news for the victims of domestic abuse and coercive control. I do not know whether I can say that I have agreed with the Minister as the Bill went through its various Stages, but I agree with her about the delay. As she rightly said, whilst politics was not working in this place, violence was being meted out to victims on a constant, daily basis. It is not acceptable that we were not allowed to at least try to remedy that violence and that crime, but we are here now. <BR /> <BR />It is a shame because surely the past year has shown us all the work that this Assembly can do and, more importantly, the work that our Committees do. Whilst it is true, as the Minister stated, that politics did not work for three years, every single politician in this room was working away.”
“I wish it was not so, but they are much needed. They do sterling work. The Bill is for them. It is to help them, to arm them and to support them in the work that they do in supporting victims. This is a good day. We can move on with confidence, get to the Final Stage as quickly as we can and deliver for the victims of domestic violence and coercive control.”
“The Bill is our best stab at that, and it should give us a sense of achievement and satisfaction. However, we must never lose sight of the people at the heart of this. They are the victims, their families, the fathers, mothers and children of the victims, who feel and walk this journey with their relatives every day. Those people are worried sick about the victims of domestic violence and coercive control and the abuse that they suffer. They have tried their best to support their families through thick and thin, and at times they felt completely and utterly helpless. <BR /> <BR />The Bill is also for Woman's Aid, the Men's Advisory Project and all the organisations — too many to mention — which society needs.”
“I am not saying that the Bill is perfect, but the reporting mechanisms, data collection and independent oversight mean that we will get the best stab at it. If we have to amend the Bill, we can do that, with the confidence of knowing that provisions on data, information and oversight will be in place. We — the Minister, the Department, the Committees and the Assembly — will be able to move forward together with confidence to ensure that the Bill is even better and protects even more victims. <BR /> <BR />Linda Dillon made a valid point about the seismic change that must take place to get the message out to perpetrators. I agree 100%. We must not only protect the victim but change ways and rid society, as far as is possible, of the scourge of domestic violence and coercive control.”
“At Second Stage, I encouraged Members to consider tabling amendments as they saw fit, because MLAs are on the ground, they have constituents, they see victims daily, and they know what needs to be achieved through legislation. <BR /> <BR />I am satisfied with the content, context and calibre of the amendments on data collection, training, independent oversight and the reporting of that operation. Why are those aspects so important to this Bill when they are maybe not so important to other legislation? It is simply because, for the first time, we are legislating for coercive control, and that is vital. Other jurisdictions have had to do the legislation twice. I suspect that some jurisdictions may have to do it three times.”
“Mr Speaker, you put me under so much pressure. <BR /> <BR />The second group of amendments exemplifies exactly the relationship that we should have between Committee, Minister and Department. It is the best model for acceleration that we could ever have, by which I mean that the Bill would have been unthinkable10 years ago. If someone had said 10 years ago that we would legislate for coercive control, no one would have thought it possible. I am talking about MLAs, people in the street, victims groups and the judiciary. We are at the cusp of making history. The Minister, the Department, the Committees and Members should feel a sense of achievement at progressing the Bill in the way that we have.”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. Are all the waivers that the Minister outlined different from what is in England at the current time? If they are, why is the Minister concerned about the repercussiveness of further measures?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I ask for clarification on amendment No 6 and whether it would interact very well with a victim who has to take a case to appeal. Does it mean that that person would not be ruled out of receiving the assistance that they had enjoyed previously in a lower court? Is that correct? Am I reading that correctly?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Again, that goes back to my point about stifling debate and democratic accountability, and that is a very dangerous place to be in.”
“I plead with the House to support clause 27 and the commencement order. Let us get it done. Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.”
“We should be able to engage in debate, robust as it may be, in order to make the Bill better. I commend amendment No 13 to the House. <BR /> <BR />I support amendment No 1, which is one of the Minister's amendments. I also support amendment No 2, which replaces clause 26. I will support clause 27 in whatever guise it takes, because I believe that it is a win. It is a win, not for Members, political parties or Ministers but for the victims who have been trying, grievously, to change this for so long. They are within a whiff of success. Let us give that success to those people who have suffered grievously over the years; let us give them something; let us give them the assurance for which they yearn. I have met them; a lot of Members have met them. That is what this is all about. Most of this group of amendments is about clause 27.”
“This would at least afford them a level playing field against their perpetrators and ensure that they have the same protection. If they have to battle in court from their child is four until he or she is 18, so be it, but at least they will have been afforded the protection of a level playing field, and their resources — their hard-earned money and savings — will not dwindle to zero, to niets. They will be able to provide a good life for themselves, their family and their children. <BR /> <BR />It is vital that we carry on our task to make the Bill even better. We all have an influence. I will support the right of any MLA to table amendments that we can scrutinise and debate. As MLAs, we have good ideas. We see what happens to our constituents and to victims. We should be able to make an input into the decision-making process.”
“Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. As I have outlined, it is important that the House supports the commencement of clause 27, in whatever shape it falls. Ultimately, it is the House that will make the decision as to what clause 27 will look like. It is important that there is a commencement order, because this is one of the biggest issues facing victims. They have been let down many times in the past. As my colleague Linda Dillon said, it is incumbent on every MLA to pass good, robust legislation that will make a difference to people's lives, not least the lives of the victims of domestic violence and their families. I plead with Members. Amendment No 13 is critical in providing assurance and confidence, and in giving victims the ability to protect themselves in a court of law. Court is a very scary place for most people.”
“However, she thought that Members should be whipped to support amendments or vote against them if she saw fit or was resistant to them. I see that as having a grievous impact on the democratic process. I am here to make a Bill better, and that is why I have put my name to some amendments to clauses.”
“I wish the Minister and the Department well in scrutinising that due diligence and getting through it in a timely fashion for victims of domestic violence. That aspect is so important. It is one of the most grievous tools in the hands of a perpetrator that they can use the court as a weapon to hurt and inflict pain on a victim of domestic violence. <BR /> <BR />The Minister has been gracious in giving us detailed costings today, and I look forward to reading them back in Hansard. That is important. <BR /> <BR />There is one other aspect that I would like to raise, and the Minister raised it in Committee last week. She maintained that, even though this is her Bill, given that she had got the Executive's support to introduce it, the Executive parties should support the Bill: I agree with that.”
“Questions were asked of the Department of Finance, and we have not yet seen or read those questions with regard to repercussiveness. That is important, because the Minister says that, if clause 27 stands as it is now, it could cost the block grant £400 million. I must get that on record because that is a very serious issue. If that is correct, it would blow a wide hole in the Northern Ireland Assembly's budget. It would have been important for Members to see the questions that were asked of the Department of Finance, but they were not forthcoming. <BR /> <BR />We were grateful to the Minister for outlining that she is seeking legal counsel and hopes to have it before Christmas. That is good, timely advice, and, of course, it is privileged to her. That will help with the due diligence with regard to clause 27.”
“I will accept your ruling graciously, Mr Speaker, 100%. <BR /> <BR />I turn to the Minister's amendment No. 3. When she sought to come to the Committee about it last week, she said that she would give the information. The information was not contained in either of the two letters that she provided to the Committee. When we had a good chance, then, to ask the Minister at the Committee, I asked for all of the correspondence between the Department of Justice and the Department of Finance. That was last Tuesday, and we have yet to see any of that information. <BR /> <BR />The House is about scrutiny. A Minister or any Member can say that a clause is bad, but we need evidence and proof. The Committee or individual Members have yet to see the correspondence between the Department of Finance and the Department of Justice.”
“I will, Mr Speaker. <BR /> <BR />The commencement order is contained in amendment No 13; it was amendment No 15 last week. The Minister came to the House seeking preconditions before she would move Further Consideration Stage. If that is not stifling democratic accountability and debate, I do not know what is. <BR /> <BR />We move on —.”
“I thank the Minister for her intervention yet again. It betrayed her stance throughout the whole Bill. Members can table amendments to any Bill as they see fit. The House will attest to that. If the House decides to pass an amendment or a clause, so be it. Ministers should obey the House. Ultimately, this is the place in which decisions are taken on legislation; it is not the Executive or a Minister.”
“Victims' groups have waited so long, but they would tell you that they are willing to wait a wee bit longer if it means that we get good, secure law and that the Minister and the Department can satisfy themselves, through due diligence, that concerns about repercussion are not realised. Amendment No 13 — the Committee amendment — which concerns commencement within one year of Royal Assent, affords the Minister and the Department an opportunity — a whole year — to get down to due diligence. There are many times when Departments have to use due diligence. I do not think that any of them have taken a year.”