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 32 of 79.
“The industry is referred to specifically in the Department for the Economy's tourism recovery action plan, hence I have asked the Minister the question. Previously, the Infrastructure Minister has had to step in to support the industry. It is my understanding that the Infrastructure Minister awaits a response from the Economy Minister on what his Department's plans are now. Does the Minister intend to respond to the Infrastructure Minister? Will he do so quickly, so that the industry can get the clarity and the support that it requires?”
“I thank the First Minister for his answer. I appreciate his commitment to resolving the issue, but I asked specifically about the October monitoring round. We are aware that the Communities Minister has made a bid for £55 million to reinstate that lifeline to struggling families and individuals out there. Will the First Minister commit to prioritising that issue in the Executive and to working with colleagues, particularly the Communities Minister, to identify a mechanism that will ensure its swift reinstatement?”
“Tackling regional inequalities must be at the core of all strategies going forward, as must the model of co-design, which will provide the best guarantee of fairness. As such, I ask that my party's amendment be supported. Mr Nesbitt touched on the arts sector's economic value. I am sure that others Members will go into that in more depth. As well as recognising the wider societal value of arts and culture in our communities, we must see the economic value.”
“The Minister gave her commitment to tackle inequality as a key consideration of the renewed culture and arts strategy. To be fair to my erstwhile constituency colleague Martina Anderson, she did much to bring that to the fore. Now is the time for action on that commitment to move beyond rhetoric and to ensure that arts organisations and communities feel the benefit of those promises. <BR /> <BR />Ultimately, as Mr Nesbitt said, greater investment must be secured overall for arts and culture in order to address systemic regional imbalances. I appreciate that the Arts Council is hamstrung, given its finite resources. However, that does not excuse regional disparity to date.”
“<BR /> <BR />On the subject of the City of Culture, we also wish Armagh well in its bid and hope that lessons have been learned from the Executive's failure to build adequately on the success of Derry's year in 2013 with investment and legacy. <BR /> <BR />It is clear that historical regional imbalance is not simply a theory but a reality that has been explicitly and unequivocally accepted by the Minister and the chief executive of the Arts Council, Roisín McDonough. Earlier this year, following engagement with the Derry City and Strabane District Council business and culture committee, chaired by my colleague Rory Farrell, they agreed that disparity in investment existed and acknowledged a structural problem that needs to be addressed.”
“However, more and more money is being ploughed in to organisations in Belfast that are deemed too big to fail, and that is actively discriminating against smaller arts groups outside of that geographical sweet spot. ACNI funding for 2020-21 highlighted that clearly, with Belfast allocated over £22 million of funding, whereas the Derry and Strabane area received a fraction of that at just £3 million. That is in no way proportionate to the amount of activity going on in both settings. The second city, and first City of Culture, demands and deserves its fair share. As I have said, I am cognisant that that imbalance is not isolated to the north-west, but the figures are stark nonetheless. There can be no more gaslighting on regional inequity.”
“The UK Government ran a campaign telling Fatima the ballet dancer to retrain and go for a job in cyber. They pushed individuals to rethink and reskill, effectively giving up on our artists and creatives. I want to clarify that my criticism of our response is in no way a criticism of staff in the Department and the Arts Council, who worked hard to get the money out where it was needed. <BR /> <BR />Turning to the SDLP amendment, no conversation about the arts sector would be complete without recognition of the regional imbalance — particularly, though not exclusively, in the north-west — in relation to funding allocations from the Arts Council. It has been widely acknowledged that investment is concentrated in Belfast. That is understandable. Artists flock towards and live in urban settings; we know that.”
“The Executive received £33 million in Barnett consequentials in July 2020, but the process to distribute £29 million of that did not begin until September, and it took up to Christmas to actually be delivered. We only have to look at counterparts elsewhere to see how that should and could have been done. Germany acted extremely early, taking measures in March 2020 to ensure that events and performances were replaced with digital versions. It earmarked €50 billion in support for the arts and cultural sector for freelance artists and creative SMEs, together with many other measures, such as access to basic insurance, support for families with children and tax relief. Clearly, other countries value their arts and creative industries, supporting them not only to survive but to thrive throughout the pandemic, whereas what had we here?”
“For the sector, that period not only hit harder but was felt much earlier than March 2020, with gigs, events and opportunities cancelled long before COVID-19 arrived on our shores in its full devastating glory. The likelihood remains that its impact will be felt for much longer, making an efficient and sufficient recovery framework for the sector so important. In 2019 alone, the arts generated over £10 billion across the UK, and it is worth bearing in mind that the arts sector is the fastest-growing sector economically in the North with regard to job creation and tourism. It should be treated as such in terms of Executive investment. <BR /> <BR />There is no denying that COVID support from the Executive was too slow.”
“Some 129 organisations surveyed by the Arts Council reported the loss of 36,000 work opportunities for Northern Ireland artists and creatives between the start of lockdown in March 2020 and September 2020. The Christmas period and the year in between will have added to that significantly. <BR /> <BR />When we think of the arts, we think of the performers, but that is just one aspect; that is the final product, so to speak. Evidently, there is a whole supply chain, including stage managers, make-up artists and lighting and sound technicians, who have been unable to work or generate income during the past year and a half. I argue that those ancillary services in the arts sector, which are vital and integral to it, will be dealing with the most adverse impacts of the COVID pandemic.”
“Many of them are self-employed, making them most vulnerable to the adverse consequences of the past year and a half. Eight thousand is the frequently cited figure of people who are employed in the arts industry here. However, that refers only to those who are employed by organisations that are funded by the Arts Council and fails to paint the bigger picture — for want of a better expression — of just how expansive employment is in the sector. The number of people who work in the arts, culture and heritage sector in Northern Ireland is actually closer to 40,000. Ulster University's Economic Policy Centre estimates that the pandemic made between 6,000 and 12,000 of those jobs vulnerable. That represents 60% of jobs in museums, galleries and libraries and nearly half of those in music, theatre and the visual arts.”
“Perhaps that is why this small corner of the world is so richly blessed with such creative talent — no one can argue that we do not punch above our weight on the world stage — and why it is so desperately needed. The arts are a great healer during difficult times, not only as a form of escapism but as a medium for shared experiences. They have the magic to make one feel not quite as alone in their place in the world. Their value and the role that they play in people's lives is incalculable. Yet, there is no denying that the arts and the creative industries have been among the hardest-hit by the pandemic, its restrictions and its impact on livelihoods. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the motion and thank the Ulster Unionist Party for highlighting the ongoing struggle for thousands of individuals who are employed in the sector.”
“Apologies, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker. I was getting a bit ahead of myself. I rise to support the motion and to propose the SDLP amendment. Like Mr Nesbitt, I regret that the Minister is unable to be here. We send our best wishes to her for a swift recovery. <BR /> <BR />In the face of the pandemic, the value of our arts and creative industries has been brought into sharp focus. Over the past year and a half, many have realised the immense value of the arts in our daily lives. Where would we be without the welcome distraction of documentaries, binge-watching series, reading books or listening to music? Yet, the purpose of the arts sector is more than just its physical or final product. It is about bringing people and communities together.”
“Their insight and assistance will be vital and their contribution has been invaluable. It is important that we take it on board if we really want to know how to make those services work. We look forward to the Bill's progression. I commend it.”
“We certainly welcome the broad principles of the Bill, as well as the strengthening of the relationship between social services, parents, educators and, of course, the children themselves. We are hopeful that the work will remove uncertainty and unnecessary delay for everyone who is involved in the adoption process. <BR /> <BR />At this point, I want to pay tribute, like others have done, to all those organisations that work in the field and have worked with the Department to inform and shape the Bill. I am sure that they will be on hand to shape it even better and to streamline it further, if required, to make sure that it will be as good a piece of legislation as possible. Most of all, I want to thank the families and children who have first-hand experience of the adoption process for how they are feeding into it.”
“Clearly, families here have been failed. However, like other Members, I hope that the Bill will make a significant and positive difference. <BR /> <BR />I would like to touch on a few elements of the Bill, particularly its focus on supporting children in care and care leavers and the inclusion of greater opportunities for older children to benefit from the permanence and stability that is offered by adoption. Other Members have gone into much more detail, much to the Deputy Speaker's chagrin, but we look forward to going into even more detail as the Bill progresses and to ensuring that we collaboratively build as robust a piece of legislation as possible.”
“They were also open and honest about the difficulties that they have faced. One example came from a constituent of mine. She wrote:”
“<BR /> <BR />It is important to bear in mind that some of those children and young people have complex behavioural needs and may have experienced trauma in their early childhoods. Any prospective adopter must have the legal assurance that they will be equipped and assisted to deal with any issues, should they arise. I have no doubt that the framework of support and protections will go a long way towards encouraging more people across the North to consider adoption, and many of the Members who spoke referred to that as central to the Bill. <BR /> <BR />There is no denying that this is a long-awaited piece of legislation and one that does and will mean a great deal to many families, some of whom have, as I said, contacted me to outline what the gift of adoption meant to them.”
“I spoke to one parent, who noted that when she sought support after she had adopted her young son, her social worker asked, "Do you want us to come and take him?". That is outrageous. I certainly do not want that incident to tarnish the work or the commitment of our social services workforce, nor do I want to appear in any way incognisant of the major and unimaginable difficulties of their work. Indeed, I echo Carál Ní Chuilín's gratitude to those who work so hard as social workers in those extremely difficult situations. However, we must and can do better. As such, the inclusion of a post-adoption process assessment that considers the needs of adoptive families is very welcome, if not long overdue.”
“<BR /> <BR />As outlined, the North's adoption legislation is almost 35 years old. This is the only jurisdiction across these islands that has been left without legislation that has been updated and made fit for purpose, or, at least, fitter for purpose, and that has been available elsewhere. It is therefore shameful that hundreds of families, perhaps even more, have been denied that support and set at a bit of disadvantage to their counterparts for decades. That has, no doubt, compounded families' frustration at weaknesses in our existing legislation. <BR /> <BR />It is vital that children are placed in a system that caters to their individual needs and ensures that both those in the care system and adopters are sufficiently supported through every step of the adoption process, not simply left to their own devices post-adoption.”
“The right to family life is fundamental in any society. It should be accepted as a right in 2021, yet that right has been denied to thousands of children and young people here. In March last year — other Members referred to it — there were well over 3,000 children and young people in care, the highest on record since the introduction of the Children Order 1995. Over the past year and a half, it has become clear that increased societal and economic pressures have placed growing pressures on an already struggling system, with more and more children unable to stay in their birth homes for a variety of reasons. Although I welcome the fact that the number of children being adopted has risen — the Minister referred to that — it is lamentable that the structures of support have not been available.”
“I welcome the legislation and commend the Minister for bringing it forward. I assure him of our support in getting the legislation through and our solidarity against the faceless cowards who threatened him and his family.”
“The Welfare Reform Bill that he refers to, brought forward by a previous Minister for Social Development, was a completely different Bill. I am not sure how Mr O'Dowd's party voted on that. I certainly concur that a unified approach is needed. I think Mr O'Dowd is reading more into the motion.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I challenge his assertion that his party ever stood alone in opposition to welfare cuts.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I agree wholeheartedly with the point she has made. Would she agree that, while the uplift was temporary, the poverty, sadly, appears to be permanent, and the failure of the Executive to tackle it has been damning to date?”
“Let us unite and fight this cut together.”
“Continuing the uplift for the rest of the financial year would account for just 0·5% of the Executive's Budget. While I recognise that the Executive will face challenges in amending universal credit structures, alternative and innovative mechanisms must be considered. Minister Hargey and her Department should look at mechanisms similar to those used to make free school meals payments or COVID heating payments to determine which individuals are most at risk and to ensure that the money gets to where it is needed most. <BR /> <BR />I implore the Minister to find the resource to protect hard-pressed families across the North from the devastating cut to their income. If the Tories will not do it, we need to roll up our sleeves and get on with the job in hand. There is too much at stake for people here for us not to act.”
“<BR /> <BR />As such, it is becoming less and less likely that the Tories will do a U-turn on their decision to drop the universal credit uplift, despite interventions from devolved leaders and outcry from just about every quarter. We need to see the Communities Minister and the Executive coming together to mitigate the impact of the cut and protect people from the pain it will inevitably bring. I am convinced that action taken now, albeit lamentably late, will actually save lives. <BR /> <BR />I am under no illusion that the task will be easy, but it is not impossible.”
“This morning, we woke to news of the Pandora Papers, a major investigation into the secret wealth and dealings of the mega-rich and politicians that attests to eye-watering levels of tax evasion or avoidance and further highlights a system that is not only broken but rotten to the core. The Tories should be asking why its Government has 10 times more staff dealing with the poorest in society abusing benefits than investigating the tax affairs of the super-rich. Real, tangible levelling up would be a substantial increase in wealth tax. Rather than focusing on billionaires paying their fair share, the Tories seem dead set on penalising the poor.”
“I thank the Member for her intervention, and I welcome the fact that parties here were able to agree a mitigations package that has mitigated the worst effects of the Welfare Reform Bill. However, that does not detract from the irony — they say that, in politics, irony is hypocrisy with panache — of parties now lamenting the Tories' draconian approach to welfare, yet they handed over powers to them to inflict more pain on people here. <BR /> <BR />For the UK Government to imply that the retention of the universal credit uplift would be too costly is a slap in the face to every struggling family across these islands, particularly when we have witnessed £37 billion pumped into a failed track-and-trace system.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. I concur that it is somewhat ironic that parties here bemoan the Tories' approach to welfare, yet they were content to hand over welfare powers to them, in a move that was akin to handing a fox the keys to the henhouse.”
“Where is the assessment of the impact of removing that lifeline, ending the furlough scheme and increasing National Insurance contributions? It appears that the Tories' policy of levelling up is a euphemism for walking over the poor and vulnerable.”
“Rising property values mean rising rents. I have witnessed the outworkings of that, as, I am sure, many others have, with more and more people contacting our offices for housing support because they have been forced from private rented properties due to affordability issues. It is clear that people are at breaking point. They cannot afford to lose over £1,000 a year, and we cannot afford to let them lose it either. <BR /> <BR />This unique set of circumstances will lead to evictions, homelessness and unthinkable social costs and consequences. In Foyle alone, it will remove over £7·5 million from the local economy in this financial year. The consequences for local businesses will be dire and will cost jobs, forcing more people to become even more reliant on welfare support.”
“Nevertheless, I am glad to see the Executive finally coming to the fore on the matter. It is not enough to just oppose the UK Government's plan to remove the £20 uplift; the Communities Minister, alongside her Executive colleagues, must now plan and prepare to protect people here should the Tories persist with this punitive policy. <BR /> <BR />The cut is not only cruel but short-sighted. It creates the perfect storm for poverty. As has been referenced in the Chamber and over our airwaves in recent weeks, people now have to battle the spiralling costs of living such as a 35% gas hike that, in real terms, means a rise of almost £200 for annual household bills. Electricity prices are going up again, and, with the implications of Brexit, grocery bills that have already risen massively are expected to continue to rise.”
“As a single parent, that is no mean feat, but to have to contend with being plunged into debt and poverty on top of that has left her at breaking point. Yet, that case is, I am afraid, far from unique: 84,000 children across the North will be impacted, and we definitely need to do more to protect them. The consequences of going ahead with the cut will be catastrophic and will undoubtedly hit harder here in the North than anywhere else. If the families affected needed the help 18 months ago, they certainly need it now. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the move by the First and deputy First Ministers over the weekend to join other devolved leaders in urging Boris Johnson to abandon the removal of the universal credit uplift at this critical juncture in post-pandemic recovery. I fear that that eleventh-hour intervention may be too little, too late.”
“The £20 uplift merely allowed her to keep her head above water, put food on the table and remove the added stress of having to borrow a few pounds from family or friends to buy a packet of nappies that week. That is the reality of what we are dealing with. The uplift was not, and is not, a luxury. It is not "yet another payment for scroungers", contrary to a the characterisation that I have seen being bandied around on social media and, indeed, by senior Tory politicians in recent weeks. <BR /> <BR />One third of claimants here, like the young lady who I referred to, are working. She is genuinely worried, as are so many thousands of people, about what the weeks ahead will mean for her and her children. She is juggling a stressful job in the social care sector with raising two children under the age of five and maintaining a household.”
“<BR /> <BR />Last week, myself and fellow Foyle MLAs spoke about what the removal would mean for our constituents and our constituency. The effect will be most profound in areas of high deprivation such as Derry. Since then, not a day has passed when I have not listened to desperate and, indeed, frightened people who attest to the lifeline that the £20 per week has been for them. <BR /> <BR />Over the weekend, I was contacted by a young single mother, someone who has contacted me continually since being notified that her last uplift payment will be made this Friday. She works hard to provide for her two children, yet her wages barely cover the essentials.”
“Thank you again, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker. I appreciate the opportunity to propose the motion and speak once more on the Tories' callous policy to remove the £20 universal credit (UC) uplift, which is a mechanism that has, and this is no overstatement, provided a lifeline to so many individuals and their families throughout the COVID pandemic and acted as an extra safety net to prevent people from falling further into poverty. <BR /> <BR />Since we last met to debate this crucial matter, the situation has become even starker. Claimants have already been notified that their last payment will be made this week, coinciding with the end of furlough, the ramifications of which will spell catastrophe for the 134,000 people who will be directly impacted by this cruel cut. There will also be wider implications for the local economy.”
“Thank you, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker. I very much appreciate —”
“On a point of order, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker. Is it in order for a Member, or indeed a Minister, to accuse another Member of propagating mistruths? A cursory check of the record will demonstrate that in neither of the examples used by the Minister was what I said untrue. Welfare mitigations have not been progressed, despite the efforts that the Minister assured us of. I clearly stated that the Economy Minister has responsibility for the high street voucher scheme. I look forward to correspondence from the Minister in response to my letter.”
“Rather than writing letters, we implore the Minister to find the resource and to find a way to protect hard-pressed families across the North from this devastating cut to their income. We need to be more proactive, not reactive. There is just far too much at stake for people here.”
“DFC finally has welfare powers back, after the DUP, Sinn Féin and Alliance handed them over to the Tories to inflict more pain on vulnerable people here. If Westminster insists on proceeding with this draconian cut, we need to see action from the Communities Minister, working with her Executive colleagues, particularly the Finance Minister, to find the funding to continue the uplift for the rest of this financial year. This accounts for just 0·5% of the Executive's Budget. What COVID money remains unspent? What money budgeted for welfare mitigations is at risk of going unspent? Are those questions being asked by the Communities Minister, who tells us how committed she is to protecting the vulnerable?”
“I expect and hope that MLAs here are much more grounded in the reality of what the cut means for people in the areas in which we all live. I am concerned about my constituents. I am concerned about men, women and children in Derry who will be most adversely impacted by the cut. Reports show that child poverty is a reality for a quarter of the children in Northern Ireland. That problem is most acute in areas such as Foyle. If we do not fight for the needs of those children and their families, people whom we are supposed to be here to represent, who will? What will we do in the wake of the removal? Will we sit on our hands or ensure that people are signposted to debt and advice agencies, as the Minister has suggested? <BR /> <BR />We are a devolved Government.”
“That statement demonstrated not only a complete lack of compassion but a complete lack of understanding of how the benefit, for which she has responsibility, works.”
“I proposed that, given that DFC already held those people's details, the voucher should be automatically issued to that cohort. I still await a response. <BR /> <BR />I digress; I will return to the matter at hand. The reason that Boris Johnson and the Tories can back this callous cut is that they cannot comprehend a reality in which £20 is the difference between feeding and not feeding your family that week. How can we trust a man who cannot tell you the price of a loaf of bread but can easily tell you the price of a bottle of champagne to know what is best for vulnerable people and their families? How can we trust his colleague Thérèse Coffey, who just last week condescendingly suggested that claimants should work more hours?”
“Minister Hargey has joined her counterparts in other devolved regions in writing to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to oppose the cut. We welcome that, but, sadly, it does not go nearly far enough. <BR /> <BR />The Minister often speaks of her commitment to protect vulnerable people, and we welcome her words, yet real scrutiny of the track record of the Minister and that of her party tells a different story. We still wait for legislation to close the loopholes in welfare mitigations, and the Minister's silence on concerns about access to the high street voucher scheme is deafening. Earlier this month, I wrote to the Minister to ask her to take action in conjunction with the Economy Minister to ensure that elderly and vulnerable people who do not have internet access or are not internet-savvy did not miss out on the scheme.”
“Removing millions of pounds from the local economy will devastate local businesses. I recently met the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) to discuss the implications of the cut for it and its members. The consequences for local businesses will be dire and will cost jobs, forcing people to become even more reliant on welfare support. <BR /> <BR />Where is the assessment of the impact of removing this lifeline? Have the Executive looked at the financial cost in terms of the increased health, homelessness and education costs? What will be the cost to people? This is much more than an issue that affects only the poor or the "scroungers", as the Tories would happily characterise those dependent on support. Nearly a third of claimants are working: we need to do more to protect them.”
“If they needed this help 18 months ago, they sure as hell need it now. Now, people have to battle the spiralling cost of living — a 35% gas hike that, in real terms, means a rise of about £200 in the average annual household bill and, with the implications of Brexit, grocery bills rising rapidly. We all see that. Rising property values mean rising rents, and I have witnessed the outworkings of that, as, I am sure, many others have, with more and more people contacting my constituency office for housing support because they have been forced from private rented properties due to affordability issues. It is clear that people are at breaking point. They cannot afford to lose over £1,000 a year, and we cannot afford to let them lose it. <BR /> <BR />The cut is not only cruel but completely short-sighted.”
“The removal will be most profoundly felt in areas of high deprivation such as Derry, and I have listened to many heartfelt pleas, mostly from single parents who have reached out to me in recent weeks, highlighting the fact that the uplift has been a lifeline. It is a lifeline that they cannot afford to have removed. The extra £20 a week has allowed them merely to keep their head above water, to buy nappies and to put food on the table for their children that week. For them, the fear of the cut is becoming a stark reality, with claimants already being informed of their cut-off date. <BR /> <BR />The consequences of going down this path will be catastrophic. It will undoubtedly hit harder in the North and, indeed, Foyle than anywhere else. Families here will be plunged into poverty.”
“The £20 universal credit uplift was a most welcome and uncharacteristic move by the Tories at the outset of the pandemic. It was an extra safety net to prevent people falling further into poverty. Now, despite opposition from Ministers here and in Scotland and Wales, criticism from just about every charity and expert organisation and from several former Tory welfare Ministers, not to mention the dissent in the ranks that has been witnessed in recent weeks, with four Tory MPs voting against the removal, the Tories appear determined to revert to type. <BR /> <BR />Foyle has the highest number of universal credit claimants in the North and, indeed, the UK, with over 8,000 claimants. The cut runs the risk of stripping almost £8·5 million from vulnerable households in Foyle alone.”