Mark Durkan
Foyle · Social Democratic and Labour Party · Northern Ireland
“That review involved an extensive engagement exercise with charities, regulators and funders, aimed at creating a more modern and proportionate regulatory system.”
“When the review was commenced in 2021, many organisations were still in the midst of responding to the pandemic. Since then, they have faced a succession of new and evolving challenges. The ending of European funding programmes, on which so many in our communities relied for decades, has left a significant gap.”
“<BR /> <BR />The broad principles behind the Bill are sensible. The changes will modernise charity regulation, strengthen the Charity Commission's ability to intervene where misconduct or mismanagement occurs, improve information sharing and, importantly, reduce unnecessary red tape, particularly for smaller charities with limited adminis…”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak today. Before turning to the detail of the legislation — there will not even be that much detail in the debate today at Second Stage — I pay tribute to our charity sector. Across every constituency, charities provide support that changes and saves lives every single day.”
“<BR /> <BR />Whilst the SDLP supports legislation that removes unnecessary bureaucracy, we should not kid ourselves that administrative reform alone will secure the future of charities and organisations in the voluntary and community sector.”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. Like other Members, I welcome the fact that we have reached this point. There seems to be consensus among Committee members and, I am sure, all Members that the introduction of these measures will save lives, which begs the question of whether the 10-year delay in introducing the measures had an opposi…”
The complete record
Every one of 3,938 lines we hold for Mark Durkan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 14 of 79.
“Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves have carried on the work of the Tories, like Robin Hoods in reverse, taking money from the poor and protecting the interests, and the interest, of the rich. <BR /> <BR />The removal of the £20 universal credit uplift, the loss of discretionary housing payments for disabled private renters, the two-child limit, cuts to personal care packages and reductions in discretionary support grants are all sacrifices under the guise of balancing budgets. Rather than plugging financial gaps, those in power in Westminster have delivered "wealthfare" — death by a thousand cuts — and this place has not always just sat and watched; parties here have empowered Westminster.”
“Since this latest wave of cuts to disability support was announced a couple of weeks ago, I have been inundated daily on the street, in the supermarket and through late-night messages from anxious constituents, all terrified about what is coming next. I am sure that everyone here has heard the same anguish from constituents, family and friends. <BR /> <BR />In recent years, we have witnessed gaslighting through welfare: telling people that things will not be that bad — actually telling people that things will be better — whilst systematically dismantling the very safety net that they rely on. I put on record not just my disappointment but my disgust at the UK Labour Party. 'Things Can Only Get Better'? Things have only got worse.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.”
“<BR /> <BR />The SDLP supports the motion, but, given that the party that tabled the motion includes the First Minister and the Minister of Finance, we would have liked to have seen a clearer, costed policy. Maybe DFC can have a look at that rather just asking Rachel Reeves and Keir Starmer to do the right thing, because it has become painfully evident that none of us can rely on them to do that.”
“I am not sure how much these changes would cost or how the logistics of having a mitigation package in place would work, but I am very interested in seeing those details. There is quite a bit of detail in the Marie Curie paper, but I have not seen Northern Ireland specifics. I have some slight concerns about unintended consequences. How would the changes impact on people's eligibility for other benefits and support? Again, that is something that we must work through to ensure that they do not unintentionally disadvantage the terminally ill, whom we are trying to help out of poverty, or anyone in their households. Too often, we see that what is given with one hand is taken away with the other.”
“Linda Dillon, correctly referred to the good work that was done here in the previous mandate, which was led by her party colleague, as Minister. <BR /> <BR />Some of us argue that we should be making more, if not all, of these decisions here, but the policy of the majority in this place is to support parity with Westminster. I understand why, but parity should not mean "parrot-ry", and this is one area where we possibly could and should explore how much it would cost and how much is to be gained by our doing something for people here. All the motion does is ask us to lobby the UK Government to make these changes. That is a Government who have abolished the winter fuel payment for pensioners who are not on benefits and whose Chancellor talked recently, and scarily, about even more benefit cuts, not increases, in the spring statement.”
“Fuel poverty is particularly acute at the end of life, and terminal illness can lead to much higher energy usage to keep people's homes warm and comfortable. Our reliance on heating oil exacerbates that issue. Women who have a terminal illness are more likely than men to die in poverty, and so are ethnic minorities. Marie Curie has recommended that the Northern Ireland Utility Regulator ensures that its review of codes of practice on prepayment meters and payment of bills provides adequate protections for households that include people living and dying with a terminal illness. <BR /> <BR />The UK Government have brought in legislation that extends access to benefits for the terminally ill from six months to 12 months, and we, on a cross-party basis, have supported those changes.”
“There is lots of evidence that we have lots of people dying in poverty, particularly fuel poverty, here in the North. That is according to the research that Marie Curie has provided to us. I commend Marie Curie on its work, not just that piece of work but all the work that it does. Ms Dillon referred to the Marie Curie presentation up the stairs earlier. That is yet another string to that organisation's bow. <BR /> <BR />We have the highest rate of people dying in poverty while they have a terminal illness of any region across the UK. Across these islands, one in six people spends their last months, weeks and days on an income that is below the poverty line. Here, as we have heard, the proportion is over one in four. Ms Mulholland largely focused her comments on fuel poverty.”
“We in the SDLP are entirely sympathetic to the motion's aims and will support it. Of course those who have been diagnosed with a terminal illness should have financial security and dignity in their final months. In the Chamber, I have frequently called for more action from the Executive to help people who are living in poverty, so the least that we can do is unite to prevent people from dying in poverty.”
“Thanks to the Minister. Given the latest looming cuts that are coming from Westminster, is he confident that the strategy will be able to react and be adequately resourced to protect people here?”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. Minister, a young lady with autism and a severe learning disability in my constituency is in temporary housing courtesy of the Housing Executive. She was recently offered a bungalow, which came as a great joy to her, only to have that taken away when it was determined that her mother, who has power of attorney and legal authority from the court, was deemed not to be able to sign for her housing. Can the Minister work with the Housing Executive and, indeed, the Department of Health to ensure that our housing policy does not discriminate against those with a disability?”
“I thank the Minister for giving way, and I am sorry that he will not support our motion. Genuinely, we are not too precious about which Department would take it forward, and we have come to him as the Minister responsible for social housing and the Minister who is bringing proposals to the Executive on the disposal of public land and how that could be done better. Is the Minister in a position to share some of those proposals with the Assembly today?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I agree with much of what she has said, particularly about the right-to-buy scheme. Does the Member recall — she certainly will — that, when legislation was brought in to end the right to buy in housing associations, the SDLP tabled an amendment to extend that to the Housing Executive, which her party voted against?”
“Let us all work together to ensure that people have the opportunity to build from that same foundation. I commend the motion.”
“We were elected to provide firm foundations for our constituents and communities, and I have faith that everyone here today shares that goal. Right now, we have a real opportunity to make a real difference. By maximising the use of public land, we can cut through the bureaucracy, speed up housebuilding and meet housing supply targets. <BR /> <BR />The motion is about solutions. We are often asked what our solutions are: here is just one. It is not about excuses; it is about using the assets that we already have to deliver for people, communities and our economy. A home is more than just bricks and mortar; it is the foundation of security, stability and opportunity. Housing is the foundation on which my party, the SDLP, was built, and it is why we stand here today.”
“<BR /> <BR />Last year alone, as we covered — an Audit Office report was published last week — £39 million was spent on temporary emergency accommodation, yet the Executive have struggled to find funding for social housing. Maybe — just maybe — if we spent money more strategically and wisely, we could get out of that costly cycle. I welcome the Housing Executive's announcement last week that it intends to build 600 units specifically for temporary housing. What better way to deliver on that ambition than by utilising public land to do so, ensuring that we all get a bigger bang for our buck? <BR /> <BR />As a constructive Opposition, the SDLP is committed to tackling the housing emergency and delivering real change.”
“It appears that the Executive are more worried about preparing for an apocalypse that, we hope, may never arrive than helping people to face the crises that they have to live through every day. <BR /> <BR />Such expenditure highlights the urgent need for a public land agency to ensure that public assets are repurposed effectively or disposed of responsibly, rather than allowing them to become financial liabilities. It is a gross misallocation of resources at a time when housing lists are growing, families are struggling and homelessness remains on the rise. We cannot afford to keep throwing money into maintaining derelict buildings while people sleep in cars, on sofas or in overcrowded and completely unsuitable temporary accommodation.”
“That is a scandalous waste of resources, particularly at a time when the number of families facing homelessness has skyrocketed. I do not propose that we use the bunker for social housing, although it might be an area of high demand, given the current global climate. However, we need and will seek clarity from TEO on what its intentions are in keeping the bunker and why it has spent so much money on it. <BR /> <BR />I will provide some context. In 2023-24, when the Executive expressed concern over a dire Budget that left them unable to allocate one penny to homelessness prevention, there appeared to be enough in the coffers to spend nearly a quarter of a million pounds of public funds on maintaining an underground bunker.”
“Excluding borrowing powers, we estimate those costs at around €3 million a year, which would be money well spent, considering what we currently spend on maintaining disused land and empty buildings. <BR /> <BR />That brings me to another point. Over the past three years alone, Departments have spent over £5 million on maintaining empty land and buildings. Through Assembly questions for written answer that I submitted to every Department, it has come to light that an abandoned nuclear bunker in Ballymena has cost the Executive over £300,000 in maintenance in that three-year period. That facility, which was constructed during the Cold War era, has remained unused for decades, yet it has become a black hole for public funds. That is just one example of many.”
“While Land and Property Services (LPS) tracks ownership, it does not play any sort of proactive role in ensuring that land is used to deliver homes, and that is where our proposal for a public land agency comes in. <BR /> <BR />A public land agency would act as a central coordinating body, identifying viable land, working across Departments and partnering with housing associations and developers to deliver homes at scale. It would take a delivery-focused approach, ensuring that our land is used in a way that maximises public benefit. Let us be clear: this is not about just creating another layer of bureaucracy. The Land Development Agency in the Republic of Ireland provides a useful benchmark for set-up costs.”
“As I said, that does not even include land owned by councils: the estimate that we are giving for the total land is conservative. <BR /> <BR />Currently, land acquisition typically accounts for around 30% of the cost of building social housing. If we can cut out that cost, the money that we have for housing could go 30% further and the number of houses that we build on that land could be 30% more. That is hundreds of millions of pounds of public money that could be reinvested in construction rather than spent on competing in a broken market. Making strategic use of public land could be a game changer, delivering better value for public money and ensuring that more homes are built where they are needed. Currently, however, no single body is responsible for coordinating the use of public land to meet housing need.”
“<BR /> <BR />Our figures show that between 68,000 and 136,000 homes could be built if we used just 10% to 20% of public land, of which we have 11,000 hectares at our disposal. That figure does not include DAERA land, given that much of that is forestry and unusable or unsuitable for housing, nor does it include council-owned land. We need to ensure that land is suitable for development, but those numbers are not pie in the sky; they are based on a pragmatic assessment of the land at our disposal in consultation with the housing and construction sectors. Even in a more modest scenario in which we built 50% of new and social housing stock, 1,300 homes could be delivered each year using public land alone. That is a transformative opportunity to build more homes, faster and more cheaply.”
“With just 7,000 social homes built in the past five years, there is no realistic path to achieving 33,000 over the next 15 years without proper funding and fresh ideas. <BR /> <BR />The SDLP's recently published 'Building Firm Foundations' outlines some practical solutions, such as a public land agency to make better use of public land. It is baffling and disappointing that the parties in power fail to engage in that type of thinking. That said, we welcome the introduction of the intermediate rent model as a step in the right direction and exactly the kind of innovative thinking that we need to see more of. The funding that was recently allocated to co-ownership is another positive, but we need there to be more.”
“Housing is a fundamental right. It is the foundation on which people build their lives, communities and futures, yet thousands of families across Northern Ireland remain in desperate need of a home while publicly owned land lies idle. The motion provides a common-sense solution that will help to tackle our housing crisis head-on. <BR /> <BR />A public land agency would ensure that publicly owned land was strategically identified and used efficiently to deliver much-needed social and affordable homes, rather than gathering dust and growing weeds at a huge cost to the taxpayer and a huge opportunity cost to the Executive. The Department for Communities has set an ambitious target of delivering at least 33,000 social homes under the housing supply strategy, yet social housing build targets are missed constantly.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.”
“— in terms of people and public resources. We need to make this place work for people and families here and now.”
“We need to improve collaboration, reduce waste and ensure that every penny of the Executive's Budget works to serve the needs of our people. <BR /> <BR />We cannot keep putting our heads in the sand. We are standing at a critical juncture. Let us come together and make the right choices for the sake of future generations. Let us tackle the impacts of division and ensure that our resources are spent in a way that builds a stronger, more united Northern Ireland — or North or Six Counties — whatever our different constitutional views are and whatever the future looks like on this island. The SDLP believes that that future looks brighter and better in a new united Ireland —”
“<BR /> <BR />The Assembly has called on the Minister of Finance to ensure that the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council is given a statutory duty to assess the cost of division. I heard him bat that back. I do not believe that asking the Fiscal Council to carry out a piece of work compromises its independence. We are not trying to dictate the findings of that work, and I wonder what people or parties have to hide. We must go even further. We have to act in a coordinated manner across the entire Executive to tackle these challenges. Therefore, we also call on the First Minister and deputy First Minister to introduce a statutory duty on all Departments to cooperate with each other. We cannot afford to waste resources on the unnecessary duplication of services and functions.”
“We do need a bigger pie, but this is about how we cut that pie rather than having it carved up by a couple while services survive on the crumbs. <BR /> <BR />John Hume was not just our leader; he was a leader. He often said that the most important thing for any politician is to build a society in which people can live together with their differences respected. If we are to honour his memory and vision, we must recognise the undeniable truth that division comes at a heavy cost. That is not a cost that we can continue to bear without jeopardising the very future of our society. We must take action. It is time to demand an updated assessment of the true cost of division, one that reflects not only the financial impact but those huge societal consequences.”
“The big parties in here profit politically from division and are always happy to turn on the tribal taps, particularly, though not exclusively, when there is an election coming. Recently, we heard and saw from Paul Givan attempts to reduce scrutiny of his Department's spend to a sectarian slanging match. That is just not on. The DUP needs to lead, not be led by the even more divisive dinosaurs in the TUV. Far from the shared future that we were promised, we are seeing the shared-out future that David Cameron warned of. He did not get much right, but he was spot on there. <BR /> <BR />Declan Kearney spoke, and I agree with much of what he said about the impact of UK austerity on our ability to deliver services.”
“That figure can only have gone up since, and it is a figure that we cannot afford to ignore. That is money that could be better spent on essential services that are vital for the well-being of all citizens here. Those resources could have been used to tackle waiting lists, build much-needed social homes, improve education and even increase the number of police officers to keep our communities safe. <BR /> <BR />Eóin Tennyson referred to paramilitary harm and its cost to society. It is worth pointing out that those paramilitaries are happy enough to work across the divide that they have done so much to create and sustain. However, it is not just paramilitaries who profit from division. There are parties in here who do so as well.”
“I thank the Alliance Party for tabling the motion. We compliment it, and I believe that our amendment complements it also. <BR /> <BR />We have heard and shared our deep concerns today about the high cost of division in Northern Ireland. It is a cost that, as we have heard today and see every day, places an unsustainable burden on our public services, economy and communities. The separation that has existed in our society for decades has manifested itself not only in social terms but in financial terms. We face a situation in which public resources are being duplicated, policing and justice costs are escalating and economic opportunities are left untapped. <BR /> <BR />The motion refers to the Ulster University Economic Policy Centre estimate that the cost of division in 2016 was up to £833 million per year.”
“I thank the Minister for her statement. Despite the initial, sizeable allocation to Northern Ireland Water and monitoring round increments to that, the total that it has received still falls short of the amount that was identified in the price control. Minister, are you able to clarify whether the forensic accountants' remit will extend beyond this year's internal financial management to include any assessment of the structural adequacy of Northern Ireland Water's funding model? Furthermore, if systemic issues are identified, will you commit to taking action?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I just went down a bit of a rabbit hole. Does the Member share my shock, horror and surprise at discovering that Alliance councillors in Mid and East Antrim Borough Council voiced concern about and opposed a wind farm a couple of years ago?”
“Alliance has no councillors in Derry and Strabane, but it has power in DAERA. Can the Member tell me whether his party colleague the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs will change DAERA's approach to planning applications in areas of outstanding natural beauty (AONBs)?”
“I appreciate the Member's giving way. I apologise for not being quicker to respond when his colleague invited an intervention. I was digging out the piece to which he referred: Derry City and Strabane District Council voted for a:”
“Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker, far be it for me to question your integrity or timekeeping, but I just want to point out that Question Time with both Ministers overran the allotted time. I just suggest that the Speaker might have his clock cleaned.”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. I reiterate my party's desire to see a Police Service that is truly representative of the community that it is here to serve and protect. Threats from so-called republicans to deter Catholics from joining certainly do not help. Does the Minister believe that the UK Government recognise the damage being caused by their handling of legacy to confidence in the rule of law?”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. I am aware of action that the PSNI has taken, with the Department and sometimes in the absence of its support, on removing items that are considered to be inflammatory. Where items that do not meet the threshold are concerned, however, what sort of message does she think is being sent out when our roundabouts and roadsides are festooned with her party's completely unauthorised political posters?”
“She referred to the Buncrana Road's place in the north-west transport plan, but, given that it appears in the investment strategy for future years, is she able to confirm that her Department has or will bid for the money to carry out that overdue work?”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. This issue predates not just the Minister but these institutions.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. It is not fair or accurate to say that I said that it could be fixed in isolation without further fixes. Later in my speech, I alluded to the additional investment that would be made in band 5 and 7 nurses in emergency departments.”
“That is on all of us: on every MLA, every Minister and every media outlet. The truth is that it should not be this way and that it does not need to be this way. <BR /> <BR />We can do better. We can deliver a healthcare system that works for staff and patients. We know that the entire system needs to be changed, but we must start somewhere, Health Minister.”
“In addition, staff capacity needs to be enhanced, hence the reason that we propose a minimum investment of £4·3 million to provide 24-hour band 5 nursing support at our emergency departments and to provide band 7 nursing practitioners to help enhance patient flow. Those processes seem to be relatively easy and cost-effective ones, and they can be introduced and implemented quickly. <BR /> <BR />Our biggest challenge is the culture here. Right across the North, people are afraid and exhausted. They are afraid of needing to be brought to a hospital or of needing to phone an ambulance. They are exhausted from hearing the endless stories of healthcare falling apart, of political fallouts and of staff having to take highly risky decisions. The public have been conditioned to think that this is the best that it is ever going to be.”
“Staff explained that, when the policy was introduced, they consciously decided that they would make it work. There was no other option, and it does work. <BR /> <BR />What is the process here? What is the culture here? The process here requires some work. The permanent secretary wrote to all trusts in 2020, stating that, from the moment that an ambulance arrives at the emergency department, patient care is the hospital's responsibility. That guidance could be tightened to reflect the fact that, from the moment an ambulance arrives at the hospital, the patient is the hospital's responsibility.”
“When the model was proposed, the London Ambulance Service heard similar concerns and, indeed, criticism, including rather toxic press coverage. The result, however, has been that category 2 response times have been reduced by 50% right across the London network. At Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, we saw the model in action, from a patient being brought into the ED and triaged to then starting on their pathway within minutes. <BR /> <BR />What makes it work? Two things: process and culture. The process involves not only the W45 policy, because also enshrined in NHS England policy is clear guidance that, as soon as an ambulance arrives at a hospital — once it goes through the gate — the patient becomes the hospital's responsibility. The culture is one of wanting to make things work.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. I know that, at the outset, it appears shocking that we would propose putting more pressure on our already overworked emergency department staff. I get that, and I will get to it. That is why the SDLP undertook a fact-finding visit to the London Ambulance Service and to Guy's Hospital and St Thomas' Hospital in London to see the model in practice, and it was startling.”
“In essence, if a patient has been waiting for 45 minutes outside an emergency department and is yet to be handed over, the ambulance crew will safely bring them into the emergency department, at which point, staff can begin their assessments and triage.”
“They are worthy not just of our gratitude but of better pay, conditions and support. <BR /> <BR />It is great to see that workforce being bolstered now by the first cohort of graduates from the paramedic course at Magee College. We need to improve our system to maximise the benefit of that brilliant workforce. Paramedics do not want to sit all day at hospitals when there are lives out there to be saved. Every minute and every hour that a patient waits outside an emergency department is a minute or an hour that another patient must wait for an ambulance. <BR /> <BR />The W45 policy is relatively new and relatively straightforward.”
“However, we ask everyone to consider at the outset that the recommendations are a result of best practices and facts and should be seen through the lens of wanting to improve patient flow in our hospitals and, therefore, improve patient outcomes. In essence, we propose a solid example of transformation in health. <BR /> <BR />It begins with ambulance handovers. There is a target time across the NHS for ambulance staff to hand over a patient when they arrive at the emergency department. It is 15 minutes. That is 15 minutes to get the patient in and get the ambulance back on the road to do it all again. While that is an aspiration, we know that, despite the best efforts of our heroic paramedic staff, one can only imagine the horrors that they have to face in a day or night at work.”