Chris Lyttle
East Belfast · Alliance Party · Northern Ireland
“The Department for Communities, councils, the Department for the Economy, further education stakeholders, the Department of Health and the Department of Finance all responded with their perspectives on and experiences of the provision of free period products and with ways in which the Bill's provisions could be coordinated and funded.”
“That is an important start in support of the implementation of the provisions of the Bill. <BR /> <BR />The Education Committee undertook Committee Stage scrutiny of this cross-cutting Bill — I am proud that we did — on behalf of other relevant subject Committees.”
“and fighting our corners in media studios. Perhaps the hosts of some of those programmes see fit to encourage that type of approach, but I am thankful for the level of cooperation between parties on the key issues and hope that that will be the legacy for the next Assembly.”
“Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I welcome the opportunity to move the Final Stage of the Fair Employment (School Teachers) Bill. It will remove the anachronistic exception of teachers from the Fair Employment and Treatment Order (FETO) and ensure that it is no longer possible for any teacher to be discriminated against because of their religio…”
“This opportunity has been made possible by a collective effort from many people, and I put on record my thanks to research officer Connie Egan and constituency officer Nick Mathison for the work that they contributed to the Bill's progress.”
“<BR /> <BR />I thank my Assembly colleagues without whom the Bill would not have progressed to this stage and would not pass. I thank Sinead for the role that she played as Chairperson of the Executive Office Committee and for the time that she made available to me outside of Bill stages and Committee meetings, which, as I said, made the…”
The complete record
Every one of 1,655 lines we hold for Chris Lyttle, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 29 of 34.
“I thank the Member for his contribution. With respect, the proposal is not just about consultation. It is a specific proposal on which the Ulster Unionist Party has just completely fudged expressing any view whatsoever. We need to consider the specific proposal as well.”
“I thank the Member. I am not sure that I would disagree with that perception that needs to be responded to and addressed. Will he outline how the proposed conscience clause Bill would respond to that issue?”
“<BR /> <BR />In closing, it is important that the Assembly supports the Alliance Party motion here today and sends out a clear message of our commitment to delivering equality for everyone in the community. Indeed, the consultation on a single equality Bill should act as an open and inclusive process by which OFMDFM can deliver a respectful and wide-ranging public process to engage views on these very important matters.”
“I frequently speak publicly and openly about my Christian faith and the right of others to do so, including in this very public legislature. I have sponsored Christian events and prayer at the Northern Ireland Assembly and recently hosted the launch of Christians on the Left in Northern Ireland here in Parliament Buildings. Many of my colleagues in the Alliance Party are in politics because of their Christian faith and belief in a gospel of reconciliation, social justice and new beginnings for Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />I believe that there is room for respectful debate on what is reasonable accommodation between the human right to manifest one's religion and the human right to freedom from discrimination, but the proposals that are supported and campaigned on by the DUP are not the starting point to go about achieving this.”
“Yes: I believe that it is possible to have regrets about the manner in which the Ashers case has been approached, and indeed to consider it as not being a clear-cut case, but to still oppose the conscience clause proposal because it actually fails to address the issues in the Ashers case and, most importantly, I believe, is a dangerous and disproportionate response to that particular case. <BR /> <BR />I would also use this opportunity to refute what I think is a false, dangerous and inflammatory narrative that the Alliance Party is anti-Christian or that the current balance between freedom of religion and freedom from religion means that the public sphere must be neutral. There are numerous Christians in the Alliance Party and numerous religious freedoms in society.”
“Indeed, organisations, such as the Evangelical Alliance, which is absolutely clearly supportive of the need to address reasonable accommodation, have also, in their investigation of the proposals, said that the way in which the consultation and the proposals are currently framed would seem that many ordinary services could be construed as being facilitation of a belief or behaviour and that that has created concern for LGBT people in the community. I think that we therefore have to send out a clear message today in the Assembly that this is not acceptable in a democratic society. <BR /> <BR />The effect of the proposals has been to heighten tension and division in our community. It has unnecessarily polarised people and has been used as a platform to describe my party as "anti-Christian".”
“<BR /> <BR />For example, my reading of the proposals — perhaps, if the proposer is contributing today, he could respond to this — is that they could potentially permit a restaurant owner or other service provider to refuse service to a same-sex couple on the grounds that it would be against his or her strongly held religious convictions with regard to sexual orientation, by way of facilitating their partnership.”
“We accept that there should be room for debate and respectful dialogue in relation to those provisions, but the so-called conscience clause Bill does not actually address issues relating to this or indeed the Ashers case. It is wholly disproportionate and a dangerous contribution to an already existing debate around reasonable accommodation for conscience in equality and anti-discrimination law. It has been fairly widely rejected as being in any way an appropriate starting point for respectful and informed debate about if and how reasonable accommodation would be achieved for conscience in equality and anti-discrimination law.”
“It also introduced a new duty for schools to provide reasonable adjustments for disabled students. These changes have meant that the law in Northern Ireland is unclear and has some anomalies whereby individuals cannot rely on local legislation to protect them under grounds which are now provided for by Westminster and European legislation. People do not know how to exercise their rights fully, so we need a new process for that. Northern Ireland has not kept in step with its duties to protect against discrimination on equality grounds. It is time that we stepped up to the mark. <BR /> <BR />I would also like to use the motion today to send out a clear message that the so-called conscience clause Bill does not address the need for reasonable accommodation in relation to these provisions.”
“Age discrimination was tackled. Disability legislation was strengthened considerably; the definition of disability was widened, and it allowed for carers, friends and families of people with a disability to be protected under the law if they were discriminated against.”
“<BR /> <BR />There was a UK consultation on a single equality Bill for Northern Ireland as long ago as July 2003, and we believe that a fresh consultation on that single equality Bill for Northern Ireland is long overdue. The Equality Act 2010 in Great Britain brought together previous equality law provisions there and harmonised them in a single law. That strengthened the law in a number of areas and shows that changes need to be made in Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />What are the key differences in Northern Ireland? Inconsistencies in equality law were ironed out in the 2010 Act by ensuring that uniform protection across all grounds was established. For example, race equality legislation was amended to provide equal protection on the grounds of colour and nationality as on the grounds of race, ethnic origin and nationality.”
“It would be an important piece of legislation to harmonise existing Northern Ireland equality law and, indeed, to extend and update existing equality legislation. <BR /> <BR />The existing body of equality law spans a period of over 40 years. We have had equal pay legislation, anti-sex-discrimination legislation, fair employment law, disability legislation, race relations legislation and anti-discrimination legislation on the grounds of sexual orientation, but it has been some time since we have extended, updated and simplified those provisions in Northern Ireland. In essence, a single equality Bill would bring together, in a structured way, all the provisions that are contained in the existing legislation and update them where appropriate. Hopefully, that would be a much clearer and more accessible statement of law than currently exists.”
“It is our belief that the principles of freedom of religion, freedom from religion and equality for all citizens affords us with the best framework within which to build a safe, shared and prosperous society under government by the people. <BR /> <BR />Our equality legislation in Northern Ireland, in line with the Good Friday Agreement, made some significant progress, but it is true that we have fallen behind pace with equality law in the rest of the UK and Europe. A single equality Bill would be a demonstration of the commitment of the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister and, indeed, the Executive to put in place clear and concise equality law for all citizens in Northern Ireland.”
“I welcome the opportunity, on behalf of the Alliance Party, to propose the motion, which calls for a single equality Act in Northern Ireland. The fact that we are created equally and equality before the law are fundamental principles in any democratic society and, indeed, are reflective of the Alliance Party's long-standing commitment to building a shared society for everyone that is based on religious and civil liberty and equality for all citizens regardless of age, gender, disability, race, ethnicity or sexual orientation. It is also in line with our stand against discrimination or stigmatisation of any kind.”
“What level and type of contact does the Minister hope for between pupils at shared education of that kind? How will he know if it has been achieved?”
“What level and type of shared contact will occur between pupils in shared education of this kind?”
“I thank the junior Minister for her update on the issue and welcome the long overdue progress on legislation to protect people from age discrimination. The older person's parliament in particular will welcome this long overdue announcement. What did the Minister make of the evidence that was given to the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister about those under 16 who have been excluded from the legislation? In that evidence, there were assurances that exemptions could be delivered that should allow the legislation to be extended to all ages.”
“I welcome the detail that the Minister has set out on the proposals. On behalf of Alliance Party council colleagues in the area and businesspeople who have been in touch with me, I seek his assurances that the transfer will be conducted with the harbour in an adequate state of repair.”
“I welcome progress on the important Stormont House commitment to improve the effectiveness of the Northern Ireland Executive. Will the First Minister provide an update on the Stormont House commitment to deliver an independent audit of the cost of division to all Departments to ensure service delivery that promotes sharing over separation in Northern Ireland?”
“I also ask the Minister what specific plans he has for that intensification of support and work in conjunction with the independent advice services. Can he confirm again that adequate resources will be given to the successful, efficient and essential independent advice centres that exist in our community, such as the East Belfast Independent Advice Centre?”
“Perhaps the Minister can go into more detail on how the Social Security Agency is performing against its existing targets for benefit uptake, given that, as Mr Agnew stated today, the Minister proposes an amendment that makes no specific reference to independent advice services. There are concerns that the support would go not to independent advice services but to statutory advice services. It would be good if the Minister could speak to how statutory services such as the Social Security Agency are performing against their targets for benefit uptake.”
“Regardless of a duty or otherwise, it is essential that we get firm and clear assurances from the Minister that his Department and the Executive will adequately resource independent advice services so that they can continue to achieve excellent outcomes for our community. I have asked for assurances on how he believes the transfer to councils of the responsibility for independent advice services will be a more efficient and more helpful way to support and deliver those services. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the Minister's assurances, but I would be grateful for greater clarity on the key question of how that £4·5 million is being distributed and utilised.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. I agree with the spirit of the concern that he raises, and I hope that the Minister will be able to clarify why his assurances to intensify support for independent advice services mean that his amendment should be supported in lieu of the amendment that clearly states the duty on independent services. <BR /> <BR />The Minister, in his response to the debate on the Bill's previous stage, raised a concern that placing a statutory duty on independent advice services might hamper their independent nature. I am not sure that I agree with that, and perhaps the Minister would care to elaborate.”
“<BR /> <BR />I remind the Minster that the East Belfast Independent Advice Centre, and many other advice centres of its kind, achieve these outcomes on a relative shoestring, and it appears that that shoestring could be getting shorter. I mentioned that the centre gets a mere £40,000 from DSD, and my understanding is that gets only £30,000 from the council, yet it returns millions of pounds in benefit entitlement and assistance to the people of Northern Ireland. I ask him again to be more specific about how exactly the work to support those important services will be intensified and improved.”
“I would be grateful if he would go into more detail on how councils will be able to distribute and maximise these resources in an even better way than is the case currently. He gave a commitment and an assurance that work with independent advice services would be intensified, and he acknowledged the case that I made for the excellent work of the East Belfast Independent Advice Centre. He commended its work, which I am grateful for, and he referred to the huge amounts that it is able to draw down on behalf of some of the most vulnerable. Indeed, he said that this efficiency was a model that could be transferred to the rest of Northern Ireland.”
“Will he go into more detail as to how exactly that £4·5 million budget is being distributed and what outcomes are being achieved through it? He knows that, at the previous stage, I raised my concern that the East Belfast Independent Advice Centre, which receives, as far as I am aware, a mere £40,000 from DSD, achieves significant outcomes for that investment. In the overall scheme of £4·5 million, that seems a very small investment. It would be good to know how the greater part of that £4·5 million is being distributed and what type of outcomes are being achieved as a result. <BR /> <BR />The Minister also spoke of how responsibility for independent advice services would transfer to councils.”
“I want to make some progress. <BR /> <BR />I take the opportunity to return to the amendments concerned with ensuring access to independent advice services. At Consideration Stage, I sought assurances from the Minister as to how he would ensure adequate access and resourcing for independent advice services in lieu of a statutory duty to ensure access to them. I was grateful for his response in his winding-up speech. He set out the current provision for independent advice services through the DSD advice services strategy, Opening Doors, and confirmed a budget of around £4·5 million for advice services in Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />I have a few additional questions for the Minister, and I hope that he will be able to respond.”
“I start by saying that Mr Attwood and Mr Durkan might want to reflect on the accusations that they have made about the validity of multiparty agreements on this issue, given the SDLP's inability to get one-party agreement on any issue at this time. <BR /> <BR />My Alliance Party colleague Stewart Dickson set out the general Alliance Party position at this stage of the Welfare Reform Bill and the rationale for opposing amendments.”
“I thank the Minister for her response and look forward to hearing the interim findings on that important report. In addition to the wider review, will the Minister join me in condemning the concerning accounts that we have received of brutal cat poisoning in the Dundonald area of east Belfast and take the opportunity to advise members of the public how best to respond and seek action against that type of crime?”
“I welcome the work that the Minister has done to maintain concessionary fares. I take the opportunity to put it on record that, despite the best efforts of the DUP to suggest otherwise, the Alliance Party has at no time proposed the withdrawal of free public travel for older people. I ask the Minister whether any assessment has been undertaken on what percentage of free public transport is used by people in employment.”
“— to make Northern Ireland the best regional economy in Europe.”
“We have also supported other fiscal devolution, such as corporation tax, providing that we make the adequate investment in skills. Of course, there are other policy tools that we can use to achieve those aims. <BR /> <BR />In closing, it is essential that leadership is shown by the Executive and Assembly through exploring those fair and progressive revenue-raising measures. They need to get real about tackling the cost of division. As Mrs Cochrane said, we are not accountable for our tax take, but we are accountable for our tax waste. I fear that, in the DUP and the Finance Minister, we are seeing a party of high tax waste. It is essential that we, as an Assembly and Executive, move to address that and to ensure that we invest in our public services and support our private sector so that it has the platform it needs —”
“Indeed, it is a failure of leadership on the part of the Minister and his party not to identify the need to tackle that challenge. <BR /> <BR />Mrs Cochrane also set out the need for us to approach education in a much more integrated manner. The Minister raised the issue of teacher training in Northern Ireland. We have four teacher training colleges for around 1·8 million people. Some people have referred to the system as one that trains Catholic and Protestant teachers separately, trains too many teachers and sacrifices economic value to fund itself. We need to get real in the Assembly and tackle that undue cost of separation and duplication. <BR /> <BR />The Alliance Party has set out the need to redirect subsidies that support people who can afford to pay for services rather than helping the most vulnerable.”
“She also set out the commitment that the Assembly and Executive need to have to address waste and the cost of division, which is estimated to be in the region of over £1 billion a year. Mrs Cochrane said that the Stormont House Agreement and Together: Building a United Community, which is now almost two years old, set out clear commitments for every Department to audit all its policies to consider how it supports sharing over separation rather than division and waste. It is interesting that the Finance Minister today chose to dismiss the need to tackle that waste and division; he said that it was a proposal that tinkers around the edge. It is a disgrace to say that tackling the £1 billion cost of division is tinkering around the edge.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Alliance Party opposed the Budget at the Executive and in the Assembly because of what it believes is the lack of a long-term strategic approach to serious social and economic challenges. The Finance Minister said that the Budget was about tough choices, but he has deferred numerous difficult decisions on many issues. He has chosen to shirk fair revenue-raising consideration and redistribution, which has resulted in a failure adequately to invest in many essential public services that are critical to the health, economic development and environmental well-being of our community. <BR /> <BR />My colleague Judith Cochrane MLA set out extremely capably the sound budgetary strategy that the Alliance Party would take. It balances reduction, efficiencies and fair revenue raising.”
“I welcome the opportunity to discuss budgetary matters and, indeed, to see the Executive and Assembly give a commitment to consider and explore fair, progressive revenue raising. The Alliance amendment supports this commitment, and it also goes further by calling for the Executive not only to explore fair, progressive revenue raising but to get real about the need to tackle the cost of division and waste. I welcome Sinn Féin's realisation, albeit delayed, that the Alliance Party approach to fair, progressive revenue raising in the Budget is one that should be given due consideration. We must emphasise and note — let it be recorded today — that the DUP and the Ulster Unionist Party have rejected the Assembly and the Executive reaffirming their commitment to tackle waste and division in our society. That is the real disgrace today.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Will he not acknowledge that taxation policy that redistributes wealth from those who can afford it to the most vulnerable in our society is progressive, in and of itself? Perhaps he can speak to that.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Will the Member not acknowledge that the direction of the Sinn Féin motion and the Alliance Party amendment is that the homework should be done and options explored? Why would he seek to reject that approach?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. If I am not wrong, he is saying that he will not support the Alliance Party amendment because it states that the Executive should consider fair and progressive revenue-raising measures. That is exactly what the Sinn Féin motion says as well, so will the Member also be opposing the motion?”
“I thank the Minister for giving way and for his contribution so far. Just in case he is not going to return to it: he helpfully set out that reviews are showing that the 500 20 mph zones in existence are effective at reducing speed and collisions. Will he touch on the potential outcomes being achieved by the five pilot 20 mph sign-only speed limit streets?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Will he also acknowledge that I also said that it may be questionable as to whether the Department and the Minister are using that power enough currently?”
“So there is significant support, and the proposals would contribute to key Programme for Government targets in relation to encouraging active travel, particularly to schools, and the Northern Ireland road safety strategy, which has a clear commitment to considering 20 mph speed limits for cycling encouragement and to improve cycling infrastructure. <BR /> <BR />In conclusion, if, on further scrutiny, we find that the proposals will reduce speed limits on residential roads, ensure fewer accidents and fatalities and encourage more people to walk and cycle for everyday journeys, thus improving our environment and public health, the Bill will indeed have the support of the Assembly. We need to take heed of what the evidence shows as being the best way of achieving those objectives in the most cost-effective way.”
“<BR /> <BR />Other Members have touched on the significant support that exists for the proposal, which is true. A Sustrans opinion survey found that 70% of respondents supported a limit of 20 mph on residential roads. A Department for Transport poll found that 73% of respondents were in favour of 20 mph speed limits but that the priority, if necessary, should be areas where children travel or play, such as around schools. There has also been a NISRA/DOE road safety monitor 2014 survey, which found slightly different results in that 63% of non-drivers supported the proposal compared with 47% of drivers, 55% of people living in built-up areas and 44% of rural dwellers. That survey also found that 70% of people were in favour of the proposal of 20 mph speed limits outside schools.”
“That is still a significant amount of money and does not include the package of measures that so many people say we need to truly achieve the objectives that we want. <BR /> <BR />We can compare that with the £1 million per year that the Department for Regional Development and the Public Health Agency invest in the active schools travel programme. That delivers exceptional on-road cycle training for our young people and infrastructure improvements around schools. We have to acknowledge that the Minister has an extremely tight budget. I have not heard too many people today making any particular proposals as to where the extra £500,000 per year — £6 million in total — is going to come from. Perhaps the Minister can advise on that. We need to be realistic: we will have to allocate budget to achieve what is being proposed.”
“We need to heed those concerns and to take them into consideration at Committee Stage. <BR /> <BR />There has been debate about the costs; there has been some dismissal of them, but we have to consider them. It is my understanding that DRD traffic calming for greater Belfast from 2007 to 2010 was around £500,000 per year. As a comparator, it is my understanding that around 400 kilometres of 20 mph sign-only streets in Portsmouth cost in the region of £573,000. My understanding is that there are around 4,300 kilometres of unclassified roads in Northern Ireland. An extrapolation of that would lead to sign only costing in the region of £6 million. I know that we heard quotes of £25 million to £30 million, but I think that for sign only, it would be more like an estimation of £6 million.”
“I would like to hear from the Minister about whether, given that he has the powers and tools already available to him to do this, he thinks that it is possible for him to significantly increase the provision that we have seen to date. <BR /> <BR />The Regional Development Committee also heard evidence from PSNI Chief Inspector Diane Pennington, who stated clearly that:”
“<BR /> <BR />The contributor to the Committee from the Department for Regional Development also said that, rather than having a blanket scheme, the Department's approach would be to test 20 mph sign-only streets and to increase their introduction through current legislation on a targeted basis. The responsible legislator in me wants to make sure that we are putting in place legislation that will achieve actual outcomes. If we are to take that approach, having only five 20 mph sign-only street pilots is quite a low provision from the Department for Regional Development, given its aspiration to deliver a cycling revolution.”
“<BR /> <BR />Whilst I accept that Members are committed to looking at improving and changing the Bill at Committee Stage, which the proposer acknowledged that he is open to, I think that there is a fundamental concern. In essence, at its core, the Bill proposes a blanket approach. Once we get into amending it, I think that there will be a debate about whether the tools that we need to achieve some of these objectives are already available to the Department. We need to look more at how we ensure that those tools are being used as actively and robustly as possible to deliver what we want to see achieved.”
“He went on to look at research from the Transport Research Laboratory, which provides evidence to show that, whilst both approaches can bring about speed reductions, the 20 mph zone is the more effective of the two measures. <BR /> <BR />He also touched on PSNI cooperation with these approaches, saying that the PSNI was encouraged to support 20 mph sign-only speed limit pilots on the basis that there was no significant expectation of enforcement. The 20 mph zones are significantly more self-enforcing, reducing speed limits by around 9 mph, compared with the 1 mph of the sign-only streets. He also stated clearly that the Department for Regional Development did not necessarily need legislation to introduce a 20 mph speed limit in any street and was reluctant to adopt a blanket approach as opposed to a more targeted one.”
“<BR /> <BR />I think the policy supports both types of 20 mph provision but is moving towards suggesting that the evidence shows that the package of measures is the most effective way of achieving the objectives we all wish to achieve. <BR /> <BR />The DRD Transport NI head of engineering services gave evidence to the Regional Development Committee — before my time on the Committee — and had helpful contributions to make. He said clearly that:”