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 4 of 79.
“The Bill already makes provision for sign language classes for young people under the age of 25 and their families, guardians and carers. That is welcome and necessary, but we do not think that it goes far enough. Across the North, growing numbers of adults lose their hearing later in life through age, illness or other factors. Those people often find themselves navigating a sudden and profound change in how they communicate with the world around them. Too often, that change can prove isolating: they are no longer able to follow conversations at home; communication in the workplace becomes almost impossible; and socialising becomes too anxiety-inducing. Without access to the right support, those individuals risk becoming invisible and, ultimately, suffering a much lower quality of life in their later years.”
“It is in that context that I turn to these amendments. We welcome the progress of the Bill and its clear commitment to promoting and protecting both British Sign Language and Irish Sign Language. It would be remiss of me not to acknowledge the work of the Minister and my Committee colleagues on that. In particular, I pay tribute — this is also probably unusual here — to a Committee colleague from a different party, Kellie Armstrong, for her efforts to date on the draft legislation. I hope that the Bill will set out a clear direction and help to inform the kind of society that we want to build. <BR /> <BR />We support the Minister's amendments, which, for the most part, address concerns and take on board issues that the Committee raised. They either tidy up or strengthen the Bill and, in many cases, do both.”
“That is the reality that the Bill seeks to confront by stamping out the inequalities that jeopardise access to the basics and allow people to be left behind. Too often, those inequalities come at the cost of people's independence.”
“Recent reports have highlighted deeply concerning cases in which interpreters have not been available in healthcare settings, resulting in misdiagnoses. In some instances, individuals receiving a cancer diagnosis felt that they were left trying to grasp life-changing news without the support or understanding that they needed. Receiving that kind of diagnosis is extremely difficult in any circumstances, but not being able to comprehend fully what it means makes an already distressing experience completely traumatic. <BR /> <BR />Many individuals find themselves relying on family members or friends to interpret at GP or hospital appointments. They are giving up privacy just to understand information about their health. The same barriers present themselves across education, in the justice system and in access to welfare: they are everywhere.”
“In particular, I commend the officials for their engagement and for their willingness to listen to and take on board most of the Committee's suggestions. I thank everyone who took the time to respond and contribute along the way, especially the deaf community, whose input has been vital. As a result, what was good legislation is now on the verge of becoming better legislation. <BR /> <BR />For most of us, understanding and being understood is something that we take for granted. We move through our daily interactions without giving it a second thought, but that is far from being the case for so many in the deaf community. The consequences of not having access to the right support can be dire.”
“I speak today on behalf of the SDLP. We are the official Opposition, but, on this occasion, there will be no opposition from us to any of the amendments. It would be great to see us all in agreement on something, because that does not happen in here often. <BR /> <BR />As Members have said, this is important legislation. It is of immense value. It matters, and it will make a real difference to people's lives, as it will make things that little bit easier and fairer for them. It is good to be reminded that that is exactly what this place is meant to be about: we are meant to be delivering improvements for the people whom we represent. <BR /> <BR />I thank the officials and all who have put so much work into the Bill to date.”
“The Minister's musings sound like a travelogue, but I suppose that mimicking Bill Bryson is an improvement on mimicking Jamie Bryson. Yesterday, the DUP was outraged about the waste of public money and so-called vanity projects. To date, almost half a million pounds has been allocated to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the liberation of America from the shackles of the British Empire. How much did this trip cost? When people cannot afford to heat their homes — thanks to Donald Trump — does the Minister really believe that this was a good use of money and time?”
“We all agree that the support that has come from the British Government falls woefully short of what is required to protect households here, particularly those on the lowest incomes. Will the Minister outline whether any assessment has been done of the cost of providing targeted support to the most vulnerable households? Will she detail what, if any, substantive discussions have taken place at the Executive table on how such support could be given locally?”
“— and will not accept a world where your safety is uncertain.”
“Going about our day-to-day lives does not feel right, nor should it, because something is deeply wrong with our society. Again and again we stand here after the fact, mourning, remembering and asking questions that we have asked so many times before: what do we do, and how do we stop this? Talk to your daughters. Talk to your sons. Believe victims the first time. Perpetrators of abuse must be punished, but the prevention of abuse is paramount. <BR /> <BR />My thoughts are with women across this island and those who are afraid, feel trapped and feel that no one is listening. We see and hear you. We cannot —”
“It feels like an impossible choice: leave and risk death or stay and risk it anyway, all the while trying to manage, placate and survive day by day in situations that no one should ever have to endure. Women are being silenced, broken down and murdered in their homes, because the system too often does not catch them when they are falling and support does not come until it is too late. We need a system that protects women from day 1, one that believes victims and allows them to access support early and safely without fear or judgement. We need to ask why the North is the most dangerous place in Europe for women to live and why 30 women have been murdered here since 2020. <BR /> <BR />Amy's name was on the lips of everyone across the city this morning.”
“Our hearts go out to Amy's children and family. I visited them last night and struggled to find words of comfort in the aftermath of that unspeakable crime. They have lost a daughter, a sister, a niece, an aunt and a granddaughter. Two more wee children face a future in this frightening world without their mammy. <BR /> <BR />It is shameful and shocking but, sadly, not surprising that we are here again, grieving the loss of another woman in such horrific and heartbreaking circumstances. I spoke with people at the weekend, and they told me in no uncertain terms that this is why women do not speak up and why they are afraid to leave their abusers.”
“Today, Derry is mourning a devastating loss following the murder of Amy Doherty, a young mother, a carer with North West Care and a woman who gave so much of herself to others. Alongside that grief, something else is sitting heavy in all of us: anger and a deep uneasiness that so many women know only too well.”
“Someone who needed help but got a sentence instead, perhaps. I think of the comments of Mr McGuigan, which I thought were excellent, on the link between addiction, crime and punishment. Justice must protect the public, but it must also protect the vulnerable. This is exactly the kind of sentencing reform that we need.”
“They are about real deterrence. They are about sending a clear message that such reckless behaviour will carry serious consequences. I commend, as other Members have, the work done by bereaved families to push for change. The Dolan family is here today. They tragically lost their son, Enda. In my constituency, I think of Martin Gallagher's family — Peter McReynolds mentioned them too — who have been tireless in their pursuit of justice, not just for Martin or for themselves, but for everyone. <BR /> <BR />This is not just about calling for tougher sentences across the board. It is about ensuring that justice truly means justice: the chance to break the cycle of reoffending and to rebuild lives. Behind every court case is more than one story, and they often do not make the front pages but they matter just as much.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Bill addresses another area, which Members have touched on, in which many families have long felt that the justice system has failed them, and that is road deaths and serious injuries caused by dangerous or reckless driving. For families who lose a loved one in those circumstances, their grief is compounded by sentences that, it is fair to say, in nearly all cases do not reflect the gravity of the loss. <BR /> <BR />When someone makes the choice to drive dangerously or to drive when under the influence of drink or drugs, they make a decision that puts every other road user at risk. Sadly, the consequence of that choice often ends up being tragic, but it is also entirely preventable. That is why stronger sentencing provisions in the Bill are not solely about punishment or time that reflects the crime.”
“In that context, I pay tribute to campaigner Pauline Duddy, a Derry mother who has turned unimaginable personal grief into determined — that may be an understatement — advocacy following the tragic death of her daughter Jasmin. Through her campaign for Jasmin's law, Pauline has highlighted the devastating human cost of drug dealing. I acknowledge the engagement that the Minister and others across the Chamber have had with Pauline over the past couple of years. Her campaign reminds us that behind every statistic, court case and line of legislation there are real families whose lives are shattered. Their voices very much deserve to be heard in the debate.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. There is all sorts of suspicion and speculation around the reason why punishment is not more severe in many cases, and more than eyebrows are raised at the apparent leniency of many of the sentences received. I am sure that that is across the whole range of offences, but I have certainly heard people make the suggestions that the Member referred to just now. <BR /> <BR />I was making a point about minimum sentences. People maybe should consider that issue, not because we seek punishment for its own sake but because communities deserve protection and because the message must be clear that dealing drugs and destroying lives will carry serious consequences.”
“Yet, far too often, when those responsible end up appearing before the courts, they receive suspended sentences, and, as we have seen increasingly over the years, some are even given anonymity orders and thus granted protection in the midst of their crimes. They return to the same streets and communities, they peddle the same poison and the cycle continues. <BR /> <BR />The maximum sentence here for drug dealing is already 14 years. The law provides the courts with the power to impose serious penalties, but the reality is that such sentences are rarely, if ever, imposed. Perhaps it is time for us to examine whether there should be a higher minimum sentence for serious drug dealing.”
“It must protect the public and hold their confidence. Crucially, it must act as a real deterrent. Too often when sentences are reported, particularly in the court pages across social media, the reaction from the public is, understandably, one of anger and disbelief, with many feeling that serious crimes have resulted in little more than a slap on the wrist. <BR /> <BR />One area where that concern is most palpable in my experience is drug dealing, and I have raised the issue with the Minister previously. Across communities, in my constituency and beyond, families are living with the devastation caused by drugs. Drug dealers are not just criminals looking to make money; they are, frankly, death dealers. They poison communities, exploit vulnerability, fuel addiction, destroy lives and wreak devastation that filters through generations.”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak to the progress of the Bill and to the wider, vital conversations that this process has sparked on sentencing practices across the North. The sentences themselves often spark the conversations, but the Bill should focus them on solutions and improvements. <BR /> <BR />I fully acknowledge that the judiciary is tasked with handling complex cases, weighing multiple factors when passing a sentence and doing so within what is often a challenging and tightly constrained legal framework. However, that should not prevent us from asking difficult questions about whether the system, as it stands, is delivering the justice that victims and communities deserve. At the heart of the Bill is a recognition that sentencing must do more than simply process and punish offenders.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. It predates the Member's time in the Assembly, but I am sure that his colleagues can recall it and tell him that, when it came to the environment's place in DAERA, it was the initial desire of the larger Executive parties — the DUP and Sinn Féin — to call the new Department "the Department for Agriculture" and to omit "Environment" even from the name of the Department.”
“There is a collective Executive responsibility to protect people here, so it is disappointing to hear that disjointedness and dysfunction are to the fore again. It is hard to tell someone who cannot afford oil today, "Don't worry, this war mightn't last, and you might be able to afford it in a couple of months". While I recognise that the issue is an Executive responsibility, the Executive Office is not answering questions on that. The Minister's Department has the experience and the expertise to design and deliver such a scheme, so I urge him not to sit back. While the war may not last, it will not be the last, so it is important that we have schemes and ready reckoners ready to go if and when the Executive agree to provide support.”
“From the outset, we lamented that the Executive's housing targets were nowhere near ambitious enough, but, sadly, as it comes to pass, they now look way beyond reach. Housing needs to be funded, and the SDLP will support any attempt to ring-fence funding for social housing. However, the Minister is well aware that we need to find ways to build more with what we have. Can the Minister update us on his progress in identifying and ascertaining public land that can be used to develop social housing?”
“The SDLP fully supports UNISON's Good Work campaign, better pay and an end to the term-time-only model for classroom assistants. If the Department genuinely wants to address recruitment issues, the solution is simple: invest in fixing the employment model instead of slashing support for”
“<BR /> <BR />I will move on, briefly, to the amendment, which reframes the proposals as "difficult and evidence-led decisions". There appears to be a deliberate attempt, in the messaging, to stress the positive aspects of the new model, but to do so risks insulting a workforce that we should listen to and engage with. There is also a clear, underlying aim to cut the costs of delivering SEN support. Parents are worried that their children's years of progress and development could unravel overnight. Teachers are concerned. They know and feel the value of the support in their classrooms. Classroom assistants feel insulted and undermined. That is not what confidence in reform looks like. <BR /> <BR />The reason why recruitment and retention are difficult is not that classroom assistants are unnecessary but that the employment model is broken.”
“I thank the Member for that intervention. I can understand how someone might conclude that, particularly, as I have said, in the absence of the evidence on which the Department is relying and which any of us is yet to see. <BR /> <BR />We have to talk honestly about the workforce. Many classroom assistants feel undervalued and underpaid, despite being central to the delivery of SEN provision. While recent movement on the pay and grading review is welcome, it does not go far enough towards addressing the systemic issues facing the workforce. We see a growing retention crisis because staff cannot afford to stay on in the roles. If we continue to undervalue the workers, we are effectively undervaluing our children's potential.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-Leas-Cheann Comhairle.”
“<BR /> <BR />We have had similar testimony from parents such as Juliana Harkin, in my constituency, who spoke movingly about how her son took his first steps with his classroom assistant. That kind of relationship cannot be replicated by any system of group provision. That is why so many families are so concerned about the direction of reform. When we talk about reducing one-to-one support, we are not just dealing with numbers on a spreadsheet but talking about changing the daily reality of some of our most vulnerable children.”
“Specialists, including occupational therapists (OTs) come into schools and set programmes for each child, but it is the classroom assistants who work with the children every day, see them through their ups and downs and carry out the therapy programme between visits. <BR /> <BR />Do not take it just from me. There are countless testimonials from diligent, dedicated classroom assistants that demonstrate the effort and the hours that they put in, and the love and compassion that they pour into the children whom they are there to help. I do not have the time to get into them today, but some of the stories that I have heard from classroom assistants would bring a tear to your eye.”
“Teachers cannot do their jobs without classroom assistants being in the room. Those to whom I have spoken reject the suggestion that one-to-one support is not working. In fact, they say quite the opposite. I recently met trade unions and spoke with parents and assistants directly. Those conversations were deeply emotional and revealed the reality of a dedicated, caring and immensely valuable workforce who build extraordinary bonds with the pupils whom they support. While proposals for specialised therapeutic input are important, that input is no replacement for the consistent, day-to-day relationships that SEN children have with their classroom assistants.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Department claims that there is a growing body of research that suggests that one-to-one classroom assistance does not produce the best outcomes for most children. However, when asked to provide that evidence, the Department has not yet produced a clear and transparent evidence base to justify such sweeping claims, and the experiences of families, teachers and classroom assistants across our communities tell an extremely different story. Karen McAvoy, a special educational needs coordinator (SENCO) at Lisneal College, in my constituency, said that, if the proposals are forced upon us:”
“As a parent, I see every day the transformative impact that a classroom assistant can have. My son benefits from that support. I know first-hand the difference that it makes not only to his engagement with education but emotionally and socially. For pupils, parents and the wider school community, classroom assistants are not simply support staff; they are a lifeline. That is why the emerging proposals to move away from the current model of one-to-one classroom support have caused such deep anxiety. That support is not a luxury or an add-on; it makes school possible. Families fight for years to secure that provision. It is an exhausting, lengthy process, and those same families now hear language that suggests that the support that they fought tooth and nail to secure is suddenly being portrayed as excessive or ineffective. Really?”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-Leas-Cheann Comhairle.”
“I look forward to welcoming the Minister back to the city to hear his planned way forward for closing the running sore that is Mobuoy. While I welcome the fact that he is going to meet us, as elected representatives, it is important that the information gets out to as wide a range of stakeholders as possible. What are the Minister's plans for the publication of the consultation responses and, more important, for an action plan and a way forward?”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. I concur entirely with him that the British Government are responsible for the mess that has been made of the local growth fund, but the Executive have a responsibility to look after people here and to protect the hugely important work that is being done by so many organisations that have depended on the Shared Prosperity Fund (SPF) and, prior to that, the European social fund. We cannot afford to let that work grind to a halt. Will consideration therefore be given at least to looking at restoring the funding that the Executive provided to match the European social fund prior to our being dragged out of Europe against the Minister's wishes and ours?”
“<BR /> <BR />As I bring my remarks to a close, I pay tribute to campaigners, particularly the incredible Cliff Edge Coalition and its component parts, for their passion, compassion and unwavering efforts to do what is right for our most vulnerable and for our society as a whole. Let us work alongside them to ensure that planning begins now, not in 2027, and definitely not in 2028. Let us lift children out of poverty but also ensure that we do not replace one grievously flawed policy with a new layer of uncertainty.”
“We have seen this debacle before, waiting until a minute before midnight and then scrambling around for an extension. That is not the actions of a proactive Government; it is more of a kind of crisis management. <BR /> <BR />Families who live in poverty need certainty. We need a comprehensive, costed and funded anti-poverty strategy. We hope to hear more from the Minister on that in the near future. If we are serious about tackling child poverty, benefit cap mitigations must be extended indefinitely. We cannot allow anxiety to build, year after year. As I said, the removal of the two-child limit is great news and it is necessary, but we also need a bit more clarity on the transitional protections and a firm commitment on the benefit cap mitigations.”
“Recently, I asked the Minister whether he would extend benefit cap mitigations indefinitely to ensure that families are not forced to teeter along another cliff edge. His response, which he has reiterated today, was that it will be for the Executive to agree funding for those schemes, which are due to end in two years' time. Between now and then, we will be heading into — and, hopefully, coming out of — another election. We will have finished one mandate and moved into the next if, that is, we are lucky enough to even have an Executive. I know that a week is a long time in politics, but two years will go past in the blink of an eye. That deadline will come along far quicker than some might think, and families cannot be left in limbo.”
“Sadly, however, it is a situation that we have become used to. My Committee colleagues and I raised the issue of transitional protections, cognisant that this change could result in an erosion of those protections. Has the Department quantified how many claims will be adversely impacted on as a result of the change? We must not repeat the mistakes of the past. Welfare reform was a disaster. It is good that all parties here worked to ensure that we got a mitigations package, but it is something of a tangled web. There is a confused picture of what is out there, between mitigation schemes, transitional payments and cliff edges. <BR /> <BR />That brings me to the benefit cap mitigations.”
“<BR /> <BR />As of August 2025, 17,600 children were not eligible for the child element of universal credit because of the two-child limit. The Minister gave some more recent figures on that. Lifting the policy will, undoubtedly, lift thousands of children out of poverty overnight and lift others a wee bit closer to having some degree of comfort. While we very much welcome that step, we cannot ignore some of the wee questions that remain unanswered. The Minister told me previously that officials were undertaking a larger piece of work to determine what the wider impact of removing the two-child limit will be on awards. Has that analysis been done and, if so, when we will see it? Members are being asked to consent to legislative change without having the full picture. That is not great governance.”
“We have campaigned against it since, and we welcome its removal now. However, the change must be managed properly. We cannot afford a poorly handled transition. Communication around the move to universal credit (UC) has been a bit of a quagmire in itself, from weak signposting to the new claims grant — to help — to the failure to clearly explain the mechanics of transitional protection. If that odious policy is to be undone properly, the Department must raise awareness to ensure that claimants fully understand how the changes will affect them. I welcome assurances from the Minister today in that regard. However, we know through experience that what is outlined in policy does not always occur in practice.”
“This is a good day, and it is not just because it is my birthday. It is good to get the opportunity to speak today on the long-overdue removal of the two-child limit. It was a significant driver of policy on these islands in recent years, and the impact has hit hardest and been felt most severely here in the North. <BR /> <BR />The SDLP vociferously warned that it would drive children into poverty and heap pressure on already struggling families. That reality has, sadly, come to pass. Parties here, with the exception of the SDLP, did not just vote for the Welfare Reform Bill, but, when doing so, handed powers to the Tories to do even more damage, and they did so with relish, nowhere more so than with this draconian, almost dystopian, policy, along with its odious rape clause. <BR /> <BR />We opposed it then.”
“Thanks, Mr Deputy Speaker. Divisional offices will be working up their investment and action plans for next year. Those have been getting slimmer every year, which is a sure sign of austerity, with fewer schemes being brought forward. Once the survey is complete, will such a survey be rolled out again, or will investment priorities be dictated for years to come by that snapshot of the state of our roads?”
“I welcome the Minister's aim and, in principle, the actions proposed in his statement. We would need a bit more detail on the sliding scale of penalty notices, but any efforts to address failing water quality are to be welcomed. However, much of what you have outlined today, Minister, such as withdrawal from SORPI, the designation of Belfast lough as a sensitive area, PC21 funding and the establishment of an independent EPA, requires Executive agreement, cross-departmental action and investment. How much of the eight-point plan has full Executive backing? Will much of it, like the proposal for the independent environmental protection agency, be blocked at the Executive?”
“I welcome the Minister's recognition and acknowledgement of the impact that exams have on the mental health and well-being of young people, but I do not know how he reconciles that with his stout defence of the transfer test. Where else thinks that testing children at the age of 10 or 11 is good? <BR /> <BR />What are the financial implications of your proposals for the Department, Minister? How much money will they save, and has that been a factor in your decision?”
“Let us not continue to compound the suffering of people who are already in crisis by dumping them in damp hovels.”
“In four years, just 203 of those homes were supported. None of them was in Derry and Strabane, which is an area with some of the highest numbers of reports of damp. It is certainly the area in which there is the highest incidence of deprivation. <BR /> <BR />Today, we are dealing with a living reality that demands urgency. Every cold home, every child who lives with damp and the sickness that comes with it, every pensioner who is afraid to turn on the heating, and every homeless family who is placed in substandard temporary accommodation represents serious policy failures. We need to do better. My party's amendment seeks to close a dangerous oversight gap. It protects the most vulnerable, ensuring that temporary accommodation meets the same safety standards as any other home.”
“<BR /> <BR />We in the SDLP have long championed a comprehensive, green and energy-efficient housing strategy. We believe in retrofitting, proper targets, accountability and a just transition that does not leave low-income families behind. Undoubtedly, we need investment in new homes — and we support the Minister in any bid to get that — but we also need to fix what we have. The affordable warmth scheme, which was intended to be our front-line defence against fuel poverty, remains underfunded and overwhelmed. In 2023-24, it received over 11,500 applications, yet only 24% of those applicants received support. The 2019 cavity wall action plan found that 63% of Housing Executive properties were not compliant with current standards. Only 9% were deemed to have sufficient cavity wall insulation.”
“The DUP amendment touches on the issue of borrowing powers and long-term standards. It does not really address or provide the urgency that is required to prevent a child sleeping in a damp room tonight or tomorrow. It is a big issue that is worthy of debate, but it is a debate for another day. The amendment also dilutes the call for legislation or a legislative underpinning of minimum standards, the need for which has been recognised by other Parliaments in the UK. <BR /> <BR />We know that damp, cold homes carry serious health risks and financial implications. One in four people who died here in 2022 were in fuel poverty. That should shame every one of us into action in the immediate and the long term. In the long term, we need to look at resources and adequately funding existing and, hopefully, future measures.”