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 48 of 79.
“Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I support the motion proposed by Jo-Anne Dobson and pledge the SDLP's desire and determination to play a constructive role in dealing with what has been and can only be described as a crisis. I take the opportunity to wish the new Minister well. This is one of many major challenges facing her, but I also believe that there are many huge opportunities that she has. <BR /> <BR />I am not one who usually dwells too much on statistics. All too often, the focus is on numbers, and we can lose sight of the fact that each of the statistics is a person. In this case, it is a person waiting for treatment, a person in pain or a person whose life may be put on hold as they wait for confirmation that they will be seen, treated and, hopefully, cured. Today, however, we cannot ignore the statistics.”
“I do recall an allegation from a former DOE Minister, Mr Lyons's predecessor in the House, that that was a breach of the ministerial code and that there might be further legal action on that.”
“The SDLP is completely opposed to fracking. We now have enshrined in planning policy a presumption against fracking in the absence of evidence that it is not harmful to the environment or human health.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. I have to say that he is one of very few Members who have had an interest in this issue for some time. At the meeting that I had with Friends of the Earth and concerned residents, I learnt new information about the nature of what was being proposed and about the chemicals that may be used to assist in the carrying out of this exploratory drilling. I became more concerned and followed up with a letter to the council expressing those concerns. <BR /> <BR />Mr Lyons tried to establish that we are not talking about fracking here, but there is always the fear that fracking will follow. As Claire Hanna outlined, I, as Minister, did demonstrate a clear and a very strong approach to fracking and a precautionary approach to exploration, which saw legal proceedings taken against me.”
“Following a meeting with Friends of the Earth and some concerned residents, during which I learnt more about this application, I wrote to the council relaying and sharing these concerns.”
“He clearly is green, all right. <BR /> <BR />Sadly, most of this has come too late, after responsibility for planning and jurisdiction for this matter had transferred to Mid and East Antrim Borough Council, and I was unable to stop it with the stroke of a pen or a push of a button. Much has been made of the fact that DOE did not complete an EIA on time and that had this been done the situation would and could have been avoided. While missed deadlines make good headlines, this is not the case. Permitted development rights can be withdrawn at any stage, but, as I have outlined again and again, that power and responsibility now lies with Mid and East Antrim Borough Council.”
“I have been inundated with angry tweets, emails and correspondence on this issue. I even got a letter from Mark Ruffalo, the Incredible Hulk actor. Believe me, you do not want to make him angry.”
“Indeed, before leaving office, I commenced a review of permitted development with a call for evidence in relation to exploratory drilling, with the intention that something like this cannot happen again without the wider consultation and deeper scrutiny of a full application. I look forward to the new Minister concluding this piece of work and working with him on it.”
“As a former Environment Minister, I will attempt to clarify some of the misinformation that is out there and some of the misinformation that is in here. <BR /> <BR />What we are seeing at Woodburn forest was never subject to a planning application. It is what constitutes permitted development. People are shocked, and rightly so, that something of this scale and nature was not subject to the scrutiny of a full application, and I do have a great deal of sympathy with them.”
“I would not deny that assurances have been given. I would maybe question the adequacy of some of the assurances that have been given, in the light of recent revelations. <BR /> <BR />This precautionary approach is essential to ensure confidence in our planning system, and, indeed, confidence in our Government here. I very much welcome the fact that the motion calls on the Executive rather than on any individual Minister or Department. These projects do tend to be cross-cutting in nature. Indeed, the situation at Woodburn pervades four of the legacy Departments, as outlined by my colleague Claire Hanna, DETI, naturally enough, has responsibility for licensing; DRD has clear responsibility for water supply and ensuring the safety of it; DARD did have control of or responsibility for the forest; and, of course, DOE.”
“I also rise in support of the motion. I cannot understand why any party or person would have a problem in ensuring that any application is not approved without assurances being secured against any potential negative impacts on our environment, let alone on human health.”
“I would like to have seen, in particular, more detail in the document on how we intend to improve environmental sustainability. The reduction of greenhouse gas emissions will be extremely difficult in the context of trying to grow our economy, and I believe that this can only be achieved through the introduction of Northern Ireland-specific climate change legislation. <BR /> <BR />As my colleagues have outlined, it is our intention to work constructively inside the Chamber and outside it to help deliver all these outcomes and much more. We will continue to demand answers and demand actions to obtain tangible evidence that they are being delivered or on why they are not.”
“Plans to reduce poverty are admirable, but we have, as Ms Hanna said, seen strategies come and go. Some strategies we have just waited for, and are still waiting.”
“Last week, many Members attended an event in the Long Gallery. It was hosted by Autism NI and sponsored by Mrs Cameron. Participants described their frustrations and concerns at the lack of delivery by several Departments, and the lack of care. It was entitled "Broken promises". One would get the impression from this Programme for Government that the Executive are avoiding making promises just to avoid breaking more promises. <BR /> <BR />We need more detail. How are we going to reduce health inequality? How are we going to increase the supply of suitable housing, and how are we going to afford it? How will we improve the skills profile of the population, and, especially, how will we do so when we are voting through Budgets that reduce the skills budget?”
“He intimated that those of us who chose not to be in government, and those of us who did not have that choice, have no role to play in that. Well, we are making it our business in opposition to improve the performance of government. <BR /> <BR />We have seen — and people have felt and continue to feel — the failure by government to deliver on real issues. Nowhere has this failure been more pronounced than in my constituency. The fig leaf that has been used to cover at least one of these failures — for example, the expansion of Magee, and the economic and social benefits that that would undoubtedly bring — is that it was not in the Programme for Government. So please forgive our concerns at the lack of specifics in this document. We cannot argue with these desired outcomes — who could? — but we just want to ensure them.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Members will be relieved to hear that I am not going to dwell on issues around process, our views on which have been accurately and eloquently proffered by my colleagues Alex Attwood and Claire Hanna. <BR /> <BR />Mr O'Dowd made a good contribution to today's debate. He spoke of the challenges facing the new Executive, the new Ministers and their new Departments. Certainly, there are huge challenges, but there are also huge opportunities to do things better and to make things better for people. This document, in our belief, does not grasp or even attempt to grasp those opportunities. Mr Stalford, in his maiden speech, said something along the lines that it is the business of government to improve the lives of people.”
“The existing code of audit practice came into force on 1 April 2011. The Local Government Auditor consulted interested parties about the proposed draft code of audit practice 2016. The 12-week consultation period ended on 1 December 2015. Ten responses were received as part of the consultation. I am therefore seeking the Assembly's approval for the Local Government Auditor's draft code of audit practice 2016 to come into force on 1 April 2016.”
“Article 5(1) of the Local Government (Northern Ireland) Order 2005 requires the Local Government Auditor to prepare and keep under review a code of audit practice that prescribes the way in which local government auditors carry out their functions in relation to district councils and other local government bodies. Article 5(2) of the 2005 Order provides that such a code shall embody what appears to the Local Government Auditor to be the best professional practice with respect to the standards, procedures and techniques to be adopted by auditors. <BR /> <BR />Article 5(3) of the 2005 Order provides that a code will not come into force until approved by a resolution of the Assembly and that its continuation in force is subject to its being so approved at intervals of not more than five years.”
“<BR /> <BR />I thank Members for their contributions.”
“I would, however, echo Mr Patterson's words of praise and gratitude to the Chair of the Environment Committee, Ms Lo. I would like to think that I, as Minister, have worked closely and, usually, effectively not just with the Chair but with the Committee as a whole. Unfortunately, we are not seeing that today in this final debate of the session. <BR /> <BR />The regulations are the final piece of subordinate legislation remaining to be made under the 2014 Act. It would have been desirable to put this final piece of the jigsaw in place before the end of the Assembly mandate, but today, thanks to the DUP, that jigsaw will not be completed. However, I take some comfort from Mr Weir's pledge that the DUP will be prepared to come back, sit down and look at how we will finish the jigsaw after the elections.”
“The Member described this Assembly term as fairly uninspiring: I would like to congratulate the Member on how well he has fitted in.”
“You did not miss much, Mr Deputy Speaker. I was just addressing a question that Mr Patterson asked. He wanted clarification of what would constitute a disproportionate adverse impact. I was going to say that is probably where there is an impact that could be adverse and disproportionate.”
“The irony that a petition of concern — a mechanism designed to protect minorities — is being misused today to deny minorities protections should not be lost on anyone. <BR /> <BR />Mr Patterson wanted clarification around —”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. The regulations will add detail to the new governance arrangements for councils provided in the 2014 Act and ensure that a consistent approach is adopted by councils to protecting the interests of minority communities in their decision-making and to the sharing of membership of committees across the political parties and independents. They make the important link between call-in and qualified majority voting in order to give practical effect to the arrangements for the protection of the interests of minorities in council decision-making. Opposition to the regulations, therefore, clearly demonstrates not only a lack of regard for minorities but a blatant lack of recognition of who would be afforded the protections and where.”
“Such an approach ensures that political parties with lower levels of representation on a council and independents have the opportunity to serve on a committee. Part 4 of the schedule to the regulations specifies the procedure that must operate in these circumstances. The procedure closely follows the provisions in the Assembly’s Standing Orders for membership of Statutory Committees. <BR /> <BR />I ask the Assembly to approve the draft regulations.”
“<BR /> <BR />When the 2014 Act was being considered by the Assembly, Members agreed that provision should be made for the procedure for appointing councillors to committees. This is to ensure that the membership of a committee reflects the political balance of the council. It was agreed that that should apply across all committees if a council appoints more than one committee at the same meeting.”
“<BR /> <BR />The third aspect of the new governance arrangements for which provision is made in the regulations relates to the operation of either the d’Hondt or Sainte-Laguë method for filling positions of responsibility. The regulations provide the timescales for the relevant steps in the process specified in the 2014 Act. These provisions should ensure that the process for filling positions of responsibility by one of these methods at the first meeting of a council following a local election is not prolonged unnecessarily. The provision of the ability of a council to extend this time frame ensures that there is the flexibility necessary to accommodate exceptional circumstances, should the need arise.”
“They include decisions where there is already statutory provision for an appeal against the decision of the council; for example, the granting of an entertainments licence or a planning application. Decisions where an undue delay would result in the breach of a statutory duty by a council or where such a delay would be prejudicial to either the council’s or the public interest are also excluded from the reconsideration process, as are decisions that simply note a report from or the actions of an officer. The final category of decisions that will not be subject to the reconsideration process are those that must be taken by a special resolution of the council, as such decisions are required to be approved by more than a simple majority.”
“have therefore been omitted. <BR /> <BR />A decision to suspend a council’s standing orders would also require a qualified majority as specified in the regulations. A council may not, however, suspend the mandatory standing orders prescribed by the regulations in any circumstances. The specification of these additional decisions will provide further support for the protection of the interests of minority communities in council decision-making. <BR /> <BR />I wish to underline that the call-in of a decision is already provided for in primary legislation. It is therefore important, as I said, that councils are now provided with a consistent methodology for operating call-in. The regulations provide that a small number of categories of decision will not be subject to the reconsideration process.”
“The draft regulations now specify that, where this opinion indicates a risk that the decision is outside the powers of the council, is incompatible with EU law or convention rights or is not in compliance with the council’s equality scheme in so far as it relates to equality of opportunity within the meaning of section 75(1) of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, a qualified majority is required. <BR /> <BR />A consequential amendment has also been made to paragraph 4 of the schedule to the draft regulations to take account of the proposed amendment to paragraph 1 of the schedule. In paragraph 4(8)(b), the words:”
“The main change to the initial draft of the regulations is in relation to a call-in on those grounds. In response to concerns raised during the debate, an amendment has been included to provide for a filter mechanism for called-in decisions, which must be taken by a qualified majority. Schedule 1 to the draft regulations has been revised to enable the opinion of a practising barrister or solicitor to act as a filter mechanism to decide which called-in decisions must be taken by a qualified majority.”
“The main provision in the regulations specifies the process to be adopted by a council for the reconsideration of a decision. The process covers decisions taken by a council, a committee of a council and decisions taken under executive arrangements. A minor amendment has been made to paragraph 4(1)(b) of the schedule to the regulations to specify the timescales within which a key decision taken by an officer of a council must be called in. <BR /> <BR />The initial draft of the regulations debated by the Assembly provided that a decision on a call-in made under section 41(1)(b) of the 2014 Act — in other words, a call-in on the grounds of a disproportionate adverse affect on any section of the inhabitants of the district — must be taken by a qualified majority.”
“It provides that a council's standing orders must make provision requiring the 1reconsideration of a decision if 15% of the members of a council present to the clerk of the council a requisition on either or both of the following grounds: that the decision was not arrived at after a proper consideration of the relevant facts and issues or that the decision would disproportionately affect adversely any section of the inhabitants of the district.”
“Doing otherwise could result in processes being adopted by individual councils that may not provide the appropriate protections. <BR /> <BR />The Act makes provision that a council's standing orders must specify decisions that are required to be taken by a qualified majority. A qualified majority means 80% of the votes of members present and voting on a decision. In support of that, the regulations specify decisions that must be taken by a qualified majority in addition to those already provided for in the Act. <BR /> <BR />A key mechanism for providing a protection for the interests of minority communities in council decision-making is the introduction of a call-in process. Provision for that process is made in section 41 of the Act.”
“My officials have revisited the content of the draft over the past year, giving detailed examination to the legal issues arising from changes to the original draft of the regulations. As a result, the regulations that I am bringing before the Assembly today include a number of amendments that I will highlight as I go. <BR /> <BR />The 2014 Act introduced as an integral aspect of the new governance arrangements for district councils mechanisms to provide protections for the interests of minority communities in council decision-making. I wish to underline the fact that the call-in of a decision is already provided for in primary legislation through the 2014 Act. It is therefore important that councils are now provided with a consistent methodology for operating call-in.”
“The regulations are being made under section 38 of the Local Government Act (Northern Ireland) 2014. Section 127(3) of that Act provides that the draft regulations must be laid before and approved by a resolution of the Assembly. The purpose of the regulations is to set out provisions that must be incorporated in a council's standing orders for the regulation of its proceedings and business; in other words, the regulations provide for the specification of mandatory standing orders. Those add to the governance provisions already contained in the 2014 Act. <BR /> <BR />Members will be aware that the original draft of the regulations was negatived following a debate on 24 February last year. Concerns were raised during that debate, and I have given them careful consideration.”
“I thank the Member for that question. This order puts in statute statutory partners. As I indicated to Mr Weir when he asked a question earlier on this, councils will be able to add partners themselves as support partners. So, other organisations, who maybe do similar work to CCMS but in their own sector, will be able to be added by councils as this process continues.”
“<BR /> <BR />I thank the Chair and other members of the Committee who have and will be able to support this motion.”
“However, its role as a community planning partner is to work in partnership with others, including the Education Authority, to produce a consensually agreed community plan, assist with monitoring and review of the plan, and seek the participation of the community in carrying out its community planning duties. <BR /> <BR />I am glad that Mr Patterson told us that this was not a petty attack on CCMS. I do not know who could have dreamt that it was such a thing, but I am disappointed to find that he and his party cannot support this order, which will enable councils to fulfil their community planning duties. The order will support the establishment and continued effectiveness of community planning partnerships and will benefit communities.”
“First of all, I will just address the point mentioned by Mrs Cameron and expanded upon by Mr Patterson around the role or the naming of CCMS as a statutory partner. The new Education Authority, as we have heard, and the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools are among the statutory organisations named in this draft order. CCMS has been included as a statutory partner at its own request; we did not have requests from other organisations involved in education. The Department of Education is in agreement with this approach. <BR /> <BR />As an organisation, CCMS has specific responsibility for representing the educational interests within its own sector.”
“<BR /> <BR />I ask the Assembly to approve the draft order.”
“Councils are required to establish community planning partnerships and to work collaboratively with statutory bodies and communities to develop and implement a shared vision for districts. The community planning partnerships are to provide leadership to the community planning process. A council and its designated statutory partners will identify the voluntary organisations, private sector organisations and other bodies operating in their area that they will need to help them plan and provide services for their citizens, as well as contribute to achieving relevant regional objectives in the Northern Ireland Executive's Programme for Government. The order will support the relationships between the sectors and is, I believe, an important factor in sustaining local economic growth, social and environmental well-being, and community cohesion.”
“I can assure the Member that councils can add to that list. It is a statutory list of people who have to be in the process, but different councils are going to have different organisations with influence in those council areas that they can also name as partners in the community planning process. My view is that the inclusion of a range of education bodies in the development and delivery of community plans, whether as statutory partners, such as those we are dealing with today, or as support partners, will help to ensure that the widest possible range of views are represented, leading to the best possible outcomes for local people and communities. <BR /> <BR />Making this order is necessary because community planning is about building effective partnerships that make a real difference to people's lives.”
“I understand that there have been reservations about the absence of Departments as statutory partners and the new role of CCMS as a statutory partner, given its membership of the Education Authority, which is also a statutory partner.”
“The extensive pre-consultation and engagement work carried out by the Department and councils as part of the community planning foundation programme, coupled with the statutory and voluntary bodies' constructive response to the introduction of community planning, has resulted in the building of positive relationships. The proposed statutory partners and Departments continue to cooperate with councils in establishing community planning partnerships on a voluntary basis in anticipation of the legislation now before the Assembly for affirmation. <BR /> <BR />I am grateful to the Environment Committee for its scrutiny of the draft order.”
“The draft order was subject to an eight-week consultation during late 2014. As a result of the consultation, three organisations were, at their request and with the agreement of their parent Departments, added to the order. They were the Sports Council for Northern Ireland, Libraries NI and the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools (CCMS). <BR /> <BR />While it would have been preferable to have the order in place for April 2015, I am pleased to advise Members that its delay has not affected the successful introduction of community planning.”
“All partners, statutory and non-statutory, will be expected to fully participate in developing community plans and, in doing so, to take a broad view of the needs of the district. It will be a matter for each council to decide upon an appropriate governance structure for its area.”
“From 1 April 2015, councils are required to make arrangements for community planning in their areas, and the Local Government (Community Planning Partners) Order (Northern Ireland) 2016 will ensure that key organisations are statutorily part of the process. <BR /> <BR />While the council has responsibility for facilitating and managing the community planning process, the development of and delivery on the community plan is a shared task between all partners and the council. Community planning partners will be members of the council's community planning partnership and will attend the partnership meetings. Those attending the meetings will be expected to work to agree a community plan.”
“The draft Local Government (Community Planning Partners) Order (Northern Ireland) 2016 is being made under section 67(1) of the Local Government Act (Northern Ireland) 2014. Section 67(2) of the 2014 Act provides that a draft of the order must be laid before and approved by a resolution of the Assembly. The draft order makes provision for the Department to specify certain persons and bodies, the functions of which are exercisable in the district of a council, as community planning partners of that council. The named community planning partners will work with the 11 councils in the operation of their duty of community planning.”
“I thank the Chair of the Committee. I ask the Assembly to affirm the order.”