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 29 of 79.
“I also look forward to working with officials and a Minister — hopefully — in the time after that on the all-singing, all-dancing, strong, robust, fit-for-purpose, modern legislation that we need to tackle the problem.”
“<BR /> <BR />I am a wee bit disappointed that amendment No 6, which the DUP tabled, has, like my amendment, been deemed technically deficient. I am surprised that that has come to light only now, given the length of time that the Committee spent discussing eradicating the use of credit cards in betting establishments. I welcome the fact that it will be included in the code of practice, however. <BR /> <BR />I will bring my remarks to a close. The reforms that the Bill provides are welcome, but we recognise its shortcomings. It is regrettable that it does not go further or provide a bespoke and robust set of safeguards for those at risk of gambling-related harm across the North. Nevertheless, I look forward to working with the Minister and her Department in the short time available before Further Consideration Stage.”
“People are either going across the border or online, and I am aware of people having gone to illegal bookmakers on a Sunday. In that scenario, people perhaps run the risk of losing more than a bet. <BR /> <BR />We support the DUP's amendments, which will strengthen provisions made around the code of practice, including by imposing a legal duty on licence holders to act in customers' best interests and by introducing sanctions for breaches of the code. <BR /> <BR />We are content to support both amendments that the Minister tabled. We recognise the benefits that amendment No 1 will bring to many organisations, clubs and societies, through an increased ability to fundraise. That will need to be closely monitored, however, and I would like to hear a wee bit from the Minister on how it will be done.”
“That should be a key consideration when enshrining protections in law. <BR /> <BR />There has to be a bit of balance. I have always been of the view that Sunday opening should be permitted. A degree of fairness informs my position on that. In my constituency, for example, there are bookmakers two minutes down the road over the border in Donegal. They do a fair bit of business on a Sunday because many major sporting occasions reach their crescendo on a Sunday.”
“<BR /> <BR />We do not support Mr Allister's opposition to clauses 2 and 6, which relate to extended opening hours for bingo halls and betting shops on Sundays and Good Friday. I appreciate that that was a wee bit of a bone of contention at Committee. The rules on opening hours are outdated, and the betting industry has changed radically since the 1985 Order. To dwell on that one element is maybe to lose sight of the real issues: for example, as I touched on, the regulation of online gambling, which can be accessed at your fingertips any time, anywhere. I am also mindful that the gambling industry, despite the issues with it and the serious problems that so many people have with gambling, is an important employer in the North and that gambling can be and for the most part is enjoyed responsibly.”
“However, I have received assurances from the Minister that officials will work with me at Further Consideration Stage to discuss what is achievable. On that basis, I will not move amendment No 2 today. <BR /> <BR />At this point, it should also be noted that any levy will be land-based, as the Chair of the Committee outlined, and not applicable to online betting. Currently, operators pay a voluntary levy to the GB regulator in order to sell online product across the UK, inclusive of Northern Ireland. The North must get its fair share of that money. I ask the Minister to continue pushing the matter with the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) and the GB Gambling Commission.”
“<BR /> <BR />Given that, as of 2016, the problem gambling rate in Northern Ireland was over four and a half times greater than that of England, it is clear that the severity of the situation here demands immediate action. The Department has to be brave and take action on a fixed levy amount now. We cannot afford to wait for regulation that may never come. Those were my thoughts even before we were staring into the abyss of perhaps a prolonged period without government and the ability to take it forward. <BR /> <BR />I recognise, as I said, that my amendment throws up a myriad of technical issues that, apparently, cannot be addressed now or particularly at the next stage within the scope of agreed Executive policy. Introducing a mandatory levy is a complex process but one that is worth doing and worth doing right.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention and the fact that he would have supported my amendment. While 1% may appear to lack ambition, those in the industry evidently do not think so, because, although it was included in the 2005 GB Act, it has still not been implemented; I will touch on that now. There was even a bit of panic locally when the amendment was tabled. <BR /> <BR />Seventeen years since that Act across the water, no mandatory levy has been introduced; in fact, little progress has been made. I have concerns that clause 14, like section 123 of the 2005 Act, will never be utilised. Lessons should be learned from failures across the water. Their gambling legislation, objectively speaking, talked the talked but, to date, has failed to walk the walk.”
“Clause 14 in its current form is, essentially, a copy and paste of GB regulations under Gambling Act 2005. While I appreciate the complexities —”
“If I was not aware of that before, I certainly am aware of it now, following meetings with officials and the Minister. However, I believe that it would have been a start.”
“Placing the obligation on licence holders to pay a levy of 1% of their annual gross gambling yield means that gambling companies must pay that contribution towards healthcare costs in order to address gambling-related harm and get help as soon as possible to those who need it. That 1% does not begin to scratch the surface of what is needed, but it would provide more than the current £30,000 per year that is paid to gambling-related research projects and treatment programmes, as confirmed to the Committee by the Turf Guardians' Association. The Department estimates that we would need somewhere in the realm of £23 million per annum to adequately address problem gambling. In that context, that £30,000 figure is peanuts. <BR /> <BR />I am acutely aware that my amendment is not perfect.”
“However, we recognise the limitations caused by a truncated mandate, and we support the Bill as a first and important step towards dealing with problem gambling. We look forward hopefully to the next mandate and to working on the next Bill, should we get the opportunity to do so. <BR /> <BR />I will touch on the amendments. The Chair detailed much of the Committee deliberation. We had extensive consultation and listened to evidence from a wide range of groups and individuals. I will start by speaking to amendment No 2, which is tabled in my name. I will not move that amendment today, but I will outline the intent behind it. <BR /> <BR />Until a more robust levy could be considered, I thought that it was important to have a levy in the Bill.”
“The evidence is unequivocal: Northern Ireland has the highest incidence of gambling-related harm across these islands. It is estimated that around 40,000 people here have problems with gambling. Vulnerable individuals and their families have been left for almost four decades without updated, fit-for-purpose legislation. The failure to advance meaningful protections for people suffering from gambling addiction to date, the consequences of which have devastated countless lives, is unacceptable. <BR /> <BR />At Second Stage, like others, I outlined my disappointment at a perceived lack of ambition or substance in the Bill. Essentially, it is legislation without much bite. The lack of provision for regulation is particularly disheartening.”
“I thank the Minister for his statement, which I apologise for missing, and for his answers thus far, most of which I have heard. <BR /> <BR />Minister, the last time that I addressed you in the Chamber, I asked about the £100 million unspent this year and whether there could be an Executive intervention to ensure that that money could be got into the pockets and purses of hard-pressed people who have not been able to avail themselves of any support whilst we are in the midst of a cost-of-living crisis. Now, a few weeks later, the crisis has got worse. You assured me at the time that work was being done, or could be done, with Executive colleagues. In the absence of the Executive, is it fair enough to assume that that work cannot now be done and that people cannot get the help that they so badly need?”
“The failure to establish a panel of experts is hugely disappointing and will only serve to deny important human rights protections being enshrined in law. I do want to say, though, that this report will assist future delivery. Things are changing. <BR /> <BR />This bill of rights will come, maybe not in this mandate but in the next. This provision was promised almost a quarter of a century ago, yet political self-interests have hampered and hindered its advancement at every turn. This is about putting people, not parties, first and delivering for our shared home place and its people. The narrow-mindedness of the few cannot hinder the progress desired by the many and required by all.”
“It is a great source of shame that we are not going to be able to progress the bill of rights. I thank those who contributed for their work.”
“The SDLP and others are keen to keep the momentum going despite the protestations of the DUP. I am disappointed, but not overly surprised, by the DUP's block on this vital piece of work. It is, sadly, typical of the zero-sum approach that the DUP seems to apply to so much. A win for one does not mean a loss for the other. That is certainly not the case where the bill of rights is concerned, rather this provision is good for everyone. I am particularly bewildered by the DUP's rationale of not wanting to take a separate approach to human rights legislation from that of the UK, given its renowned cherry-picking on numerous rights issues. <BR /> <BR />I pay tribute to everyone who contributed to the consultation process. The consultation was extensive, deep and thorough and provided detailed research and expert advice.”
“That gap would allow Northern Ireland to address the climate crisis robustly by embedding provisions in a bill of rights and to stand as global leaders on, arguably, the greatest challenge facing our society and generations to come. <BR /> <BR />Another area of particular focus was equality rights, specifically the right to safety and protection from discrimination. From our engagement with children and young people, embedded safeguards for minority groups, including the LGBTQ+ community and ethnic minorities, were at the forefront of their asks. We need to deliver those protections to improve lives and make a tangible change for the betterment of our society. <BR /> <BR />The adoption of a bill of rights for Northern Ireland is in everyone's best interests.”
“In the wake of Brexit and the subsequent loss of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, this vehicle for change became even more critical to help bridge the gap left behind. <BR /> <BR />To touch briefly on some of the detail, the Committee determined that the three-generations approach to rights was most appropriate. I acknowledge that, during the consultation process, individuals highlighted the scope and limitation of the bill of rights. It is important to note, however, that this framework was merely to be a springboard to further, more-comprehensive legislation. It is clear that change is afoot, not just here but globally, particularly in the context of climate change. As David Kenny stated:”
“Disappointingly, despite the continued overwhelming public appetite for this ambitious instrument, the framework has failed to sprout wings and has been hampered by stalemate after stalemate and, quite simply, a lack of political will. <BR /> <BR />The demand is evident from the extensive consultation process and expert advice, as outlined by the Chair. People are eager to move this process along. NDNA opened the door, once more, to that process. I and other Committee members — and we have gone through a few — approached the Ad Hoc Committee with a renewed sense of vigour, ambition and hope, in the knowledge that protecting the inalienable rights of all was a key provision in the delivery of lasting peace.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. Mr Frew described us as "guardians of democracy", which is particularly perverse coming a week after his party collapsed the Executive. I will put the question back to the Member: can he give robust examples of where the law here protects people's rights? It goes nowhere far enough in far too many areas. <BR /> <BR />A bill of rights would help to guarantee the rights of everyone here and provide remedies where those rights are breached, whatever current or future constitutional status or political arrangements may be in place. I am acutely aware that we live in a constantly changing and growing society. In that vein, the two-communities stipulation is no longer applicable and must be widened to reflect all citizens.”
“What is more, a bill of rights could prove transformative for areas such as the north-west and others that have been routinely neglected when policies and legislation are designed. In short, it would help to guarantee the rights of everyone in the North and provide remedies where those rights are breached.”
“<BR /> <BR />By placing duties on Executive Ministers and other public authorities, a bill of rights would sharpen the focus at the beginning of the decision-making process and offer redress when things go wrong, as they have a tendency to do.”
“I do not have such a long time to talk about it this afternoon, so I am grateful that the Chair has done such a thorough job of reporting on the Committee's work. <BR /> <BR />A bill of rights, or the lack of one, affects everyone. The SDLP has long advocated for, and strongly supports, a robust bill of rights that includes protections for socio-economic rights. The agreement mandated a bill of rights that would, among other things, reflect the particular circumstances of Northern Ireland. It is too often forgotten that a disregard for socio-economic rights was at the heart of the conflict here. In our post-conflict society, a bill of rights is an integral tool in peace and reconciliation.”
“A bill of rights specific to Northern Ireland and its unique circumstances is the embodiment of that vision, yet, 24 years on from John's Nobel speech, the commitment made to that under our guiding document, the Good Friday Agreement, whether people like it or not, remains outstanding. <BR /> <BR />The failure to deliver on the promise to safeguard the rights of all citizens in the North is unacceptable, particularly in the context of a post-Brexit society in which the protections it would afford are needed more than ever. A rights-based framework, while not a panacea, makes for a solid foundation for peacebuilding. <BR /> <BR />As others have said, a bill of rights has been talked about for a long time.”
“The PIP process causes people a lot of stress, and its faults were laid bare by the ombudsman's report. The Minister spoke about her work with the Minister of Health. It is right that we should look at every way to take the stress out of the situation for people. Has there been any work with the Department of Health around information sharing, given the delays and difficulties that many people have in accessing their medical records for assessments?”
“The consultation and ongoing work is welcome. The Minister has, quite rightly, outlined the cross-departmental nature of the issue. While I, therefore, do not expect it to fall fully at the door of the Minister for Communities, does she envisage or accept the need for a cross-border approach, as well as a cross-departmental approach, to afford and ensure protections to caravan owners from the North who have caravans in the South?”
“It is important to note that that was submitted as an insurance policy or safety net in the event that any amendment to do away with the end date was not accepted. Mine was not accepted, but yours was, and I am delighted that it was. I am genuinely pleased to be in a position in which I hope that we do not have to move my amendment. I will be supporting yours. <BR /> <BR />The Bill will, undoubtedly, help those who need it. I welcome that the pleas from the Cliff Edge Coalition and others have been heard and noted in the amendments today. I lament that it has taken so long for us to reach this point and that prioritising the needs of vulnerable households was not treated with greater urgency. Nevertheless, we are very happy to support the Bill.”
“Those reparatory attempts now stand as a realisation of how limited the guarantees that people were given at that time really were. The housing crisis that I touched on earlier means that households that would have been subject to bedroom tax are trapped in a catch-22 situation; they are unable to downsize due to the lack of suitable housing stock across the North. Therefore, extending those mitigations from January 2017 onwards was the only logical and fair conclusion. There will, sadly, remain the opportunity for the mitigations to be stopped, removed or truncated at the whim of or, more than likely, in the absence of an Executive here in the future. <BR /> <BR />Ms Ferguson referred to my amendment, which sought to extend the end date to 2030.”
“Having served with her in the early days of the Social Development Committee — I got along to a few of the events that she mentioned with her, Fra and Mickey before I escaped to another role — I know how much effort she puts into protecting people and her steadfastness in doing so.”
“Indeed, the Minister has expressed her desire to scrap the end date for mitigations. My amendment was not accepted, but I am glad that Ms Ferguson's amendment and amendment No 2, which have a similar effect, were accepted. In tabling those amendments, Sinn Féin and Alliance are acknowledging the unsatisfactory nature of the process, which requires constant renewal. In essence, we are righting a wrong and retrospectively mending the damage that was inflicted on people when parties here voted for the then Welfare Reform Bill. <BR /> <BR />I listened carefully to the Chair of the Committee.”
“<BR /> <BR />The repercussions have still been pretty severe, and the consequences of not extending the mitigations do not bear thinking about. I have spoken at length on how this policy change has come to pass and on the inherently flawed system that is welfare reform. I will spare you most of that verbiage today. However, I will say that the number of proposed amendments to the legislation before us is indisputable recognition or acknowledgement that the Bill is not perfect. The Minister would be the first to agree with that. <BR /> <BR />Turning briefly to the amendments, we support amendment No 1, which was moved by Ms Ferguson. We submitted our own amendment, which had a similar desired effect and essentially looked at either leaving the end date in clause 1 open-ended or abolishing it altogether.”
“I recognise the urgency of the matter before us today and the incalculable harm — the increased household poverty and the financial impact — that not extending mitigation payments would undoubtedly cause. As has been highlighted at previous stages of the Bill, the unique position that the North finds itself in, with our growing housing crisis, low-wage economy and high numbers of people living with a disability, means that welfare reform would have hit harder here than anywhere else in the UK, had we not moved collectively to mitigate it when and how we did. As Ms Bradley said, that is clear evidence of the value of these institutions and the need for them to be up and running and working for people.”
“We would also like to have seen an element of backdating attached to this positive policy change. There is not a massive amount of households affected, but those that have been affected have been affected massively. <BR /> <BR />Finally, I congratulate the Minister on getting here. She said that she would and she has, although, to be fair, we, as a Committee and as individual MLAs may have reminded her once or twice of the need to get here. I also echo the words of thanks and appreciation for those in the sector who have been so supportive in getting this across the line.”
“I welcome and support these regulations, which will provide additional protection for people. The regulations will close the loopholes, as Ms Ferguson said, or close the gaps in the safety net provided by the mitigations package that people have been falling through for years. I am sure that the Minister would be surprised, and maybe even a wee bit disappointed, if I did not rehash how we got here or why we need mitigations at all, but I think that I have maybe said enough on that already. I am really pleased that this is finally being done. <BR /> <BR />I may have missed this, but, when the Minister is winding up, can she clarify whether, if we manage to — we all hope that we will — remove or change the end date in the legislation this afternoon, will we need to relay these regulations or lay new ones to fit the new, amended legislation?”
“Many producers and manufacturers have already taken steps to reduce the amount of waste caused by packaging by reducing the amount of plastic in packaging and increasing the use of natural materials that can be recycled more easily, but a lot more needs to be done to improve the environmental impact caused by excessive and irresponsible packaging. The Department is working hard to progress a bottle deposit return scheme. Will the Minister provide us with a wee update on that? <BR /> <BR />The carrier bag charge has shown that simple but effective measures can be introduced to encourage more environmentally responsible behaviour by customers. The SDLP believes that the same focus should be put on producers and manufacturers to encourage a similar change in behaviour.”
“The remaining exemptions will be simplified for the benefit of customers and retailers. As other Members said, the changes will address the trend towards the purchase of heavy-duty bags that were previously exempt but that have a worse environmental impact. It is appropriate that we take those steps in response to changes in customer behaviour in order to keep the momentum going towards a more environmentally responsible society. Small changes in our individual behaviour can combine to have a great impact. <BR /> <BR />The amendments to the Single Use Carrier Bags Charge Regulations will encourage changes that have a positive impact on our environment. The rise in online purchases highlights an area where more action is and will be required.”
“The proposed changes will raise the levy per bag from 5p to 25p. I raise this note of caution for the Minister: we have to be careful how we pitch that in the current cost-of-living crisis. Obviously, if you buy one bag, that should do you. However, sadly, that is not the way things work in the real world. We need to be careful about how the changes are conveyed or, in some instances and in some sections of the media, possibly misconstrued as an attempt by Stormont to screw people over. I do not know whether any budget, given that there is a lot of money sloshing around in Departments that needs to be used by the end of the year, or scope exists to identify where the use of single-use bags is still very high and to target those areas by giving free bags to shoppers. <BR /> <BR />Most of the existing exemptions to the levy will be removed.”
“While the motion under consideration has our unreserved support, what consideration have the Minister and the Department given to the removal of that funding stream from groups that are doing very important work? I hope to hear that consideration has been given to that and that money will be ring-fenced in the departmental budget to allow such good work to continue.”
“At the same time, the charge has assisted in funding local projects that help to enhance and improve the environment. <BR /> <BR />During my time as Minister of the Environment, I had the pleasure of visiting many communities and schools that used very little funding to have a very big impact on promoting and protecting their local environments.”
“The SDLP supports the approval of the draft Single Use Carrier Bags Charge (Amendment and Revocation) Regulations. <BR /> <BR />The single-use carrier bag levy has been hugely successful since its introduction. Sadly, we do not have too many pieces of legislation that have been anywhere near as successful. The levy has raised the awareness of the environmental damage that is caused by those items, and it has encouraged people to reuse carrier bags instead of repeatedly buying new ones. It has dramatically reduced the number of bags that are in circulation, the amount of waste from them that has gone to landfill and the number of them, which are not just eyesores but pose dangers to our wildlife, that we see floating around our streets or tangled in our hedgerows.”
“Does the Minister support the report's finding that families' concerns about collusive activity are "legitimate and justified"? If so, can the Minister outline, or at least suggest, next steps for those families who have suffered for so long?”
“All sporting organisations and clubs deserve much credit for the hugely positive role that they play in our communities, and they require more support in order to keep doing so.”
“<BR /> <BR />While yesterday's triumph is, of course, a testament to the efforts of all those who are involved with Brian Óg's at every level, it is also a testament to the work of all those who are involved with all our clubs across Derry city and beyond. The role that they play in developing our children not just as players but as people cannot be overstated. The analogy of little acorns and great oaks is well worn, but never has it been more appropriate. I am sure that Steelstown's success will inspire every club from every sporting code, but the real measure of success will not be the number of championships and trophies that are won but the number of lives that are improved.”
“<BR /> <BR />Steelstown Brian Óg's, which is a club that was formed only 35 years ago, has encountered no shortage of adversity on and off the pitch, and it is now champions of Derry, champions of Ulster and champions of Ireland. That can and will inspire more people in Derry to get involved and to stay involved in Gaelic games. Yesterday, it was truly uplifting to join supporters not only of Steelstown but of other clubs and sports from across the county and beyond in Croke Park to see history being made. What made the occasion all the more emotional was when the victorious captain, Neil Forester, invoked the influence and inspiration of Brian Óg McKeever, who tragically passed away over 13 years ago and who the club is named after. To see the McKeever family there in the midst of the celebrations was truly humbling.”
“Tá áthas an domhain orm seasamh anseo le mo chomhghairdeas a dhéanamh le foireann Bhrian Óg Bhaile Stíl as an bhua stairiúil a bhí acu inné. I am delighted to stand here to congratulate Steelstown Brian Ógs GAA club from my constituency for its historic victory yesterday. The team were crowned all-Ireland intermediate football champions. <BR /> <BR />Over many years, I have sat in the Chamber and listened, maybe with a wee bit of envy, as colleagues rightly praised the achievements of clubs from their respective constituencies. The Foyle constituency and Derry city have not been renowned as hotbeds of GAA success. Despite the heroic efforts of players, coaches and volunteers, clubs from the city have not been able to make the breakthrough at county level. That has now changed utterly.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Tomorrow, the Member's colleague the Minister of Health will publish our health performance statistics. In my lifetime — certainly in my time as an MLA — I cannot remember any of the targets therein being met. Following the Member's logic as he applies it to this Bill or these Bills, does he believe that we should therefore revise the targets that are set for our trusts and the Department of Health?”
“I thank the Minister for recognising the underinvestment or, as we would say in Derry, neglect of the north-west over so many years. Nowhere has that been more visible than in the rail network. When might the additional carriages be rolled on to the Derry to Belfast line?”
“I thank the Minister for this extremely positive statement. I am particularly delighted to hear that Foyle Search and Rescue is eligible for this support, given that, although it is based in an urban setting in Derry City, its work along and around the Foyle encompasses rural areas as well. It is a fantastic organisation. Is the Minister in a position to confirm how much funding each organisation will receive and what that might be spent on, particularly with regard to Foyle Search and Rescue?”
“Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a fhreagra. Will the Minister agree with me on the importance of City of Derry Airport to the north-west, and the importance of Executive Departments working together with the council to ensure that it not only survives but thrives?”