Pam Lewis
South Antrim · Democratic Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“I thank the Minister for her answer. Indeed, I thank her for the assistance that she, as Minister of Justice, gave my constituents Kathryn and Aaron McCollum following the tragic death of their much-loved husband and father. Her assistance was deeply appreciated.”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. I very much welcome the amendment to the Justice Bill on this subject, and I thank my colleagues across the Chamber for the good work that they have done on it. What cost is the PSNI carrying for the seizure, storage and disposal of those vehicles? Is that cost creating a barrier to enforcement?”
“It progresses 18 recommendations from the independent review of charity regulation, with a focus on a more risk-based approach that promotes trust and accountability without placing undue burdens on charities.”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak as a member of the Communities Committee at Second Stage of the Charities (Amendment) Bill. I thank the Minister and the Chair of the Committee for outlining the details of the Bill.”
“The public must have confidence that charitable funds are being used properly, that trustees understand their responsibilities and that there is effective oversight when misconduct or mismanagement occurs.”
“<BR /> <BR />I welcome the streamlining of accounting and reporting requirements. For small charities, administration can be a real challenge and burden.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,907 lines we hold for Pam Lewis, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 6 of 39.
“She felt that someone else would be better placed to take care of her daughter and, at one point, considered giving up her parental rights. That is horrific. It is not what we want to hear or read about, but, unfortunately, it happened in the recent past: it is experience from 2023.”
“<BR /> <BR />Sian Mulholland mentioned Laura Orr and how she has bravely talked about her experience. I will also touch on Laura's experience, because it is really important that mothers' testimony be heard in the debate. Laura gave birth to her lovely daughter in 2023. Sian outlined much of what Laura has gone through, which is pretty horrific, and I will not repeat it. I will point out, however, that Laura stated that being separated from her daughter in a psychiatric ward was the hardest aspect of her experience and that the act of separation directly affected her recovery. She said that it was almost impossible to build an emotional connection, acquire practical parenting skills and navigate the new phase of family life with ease. Laura felt as though she did not know her daughter at all and that she was not fit to be her mother.”
“I thank the proposer of the motion for raising this really important issue today. I have been here for many years, so I know that we have had such discussions before. It really is time that we moved the subject on and time that women and their children received the appropriate care that they absolutely require. I fully support the motion. <BR /> <BR />We know that one in five women will experience mental health problems during pregnancy or in the first year after birth. It is distressing to realise that we do not appear to collect and produce data on that. That is really important, so I urge the Minister to deal with that issue in particular. With Encompass, we have great new systems in place, so there is more than enough opportunity to ensure that, going forward, we have the data to put the appropriate provision in place.”
“I thank the Minister for the incredibly welcome £12·4 million investment in employment support. Will he confirm that that action is a result of the anti-poverty strategy, in spite of the fact that some people insisted that there were no new actions in it?”
“I thank the Minister for his really important statement to the House. You have just touched on one example, and many of our disabled population, including those with autism, have much talent to offer employers, so I very much welcome the strategy and the consultation announcement. Would the Minister like to tell us some more about what engagement there has been on the development of the strategy with disabled people in particular?”
“The deputy First Minister will, I know, agree that there is a moral responsibility and not just a legal responsibility on the institutions to step forward and provide contributions. Does she also agree that voluntary contributions by the institutions would be seen as a sign of good faith?”
“I thank the Minister for his statement to the House. It is a really important programme, and I am sure that my constituents in South Antrim and those great organisations will be keen to avail themselves of it. Will the Minister consider making it a rolling programme so that community assets can be maintained well into the future?”
“— and the specialist services that women not only need but have waited far too long for. They have waited long enough.”
“<BR /> <BR />We owe it to every woman who has suffered in silence for far too long to finally act. Women should not have to fight for support, wait nearly a decade for diagnosis or be left to navigate the condition on their own. The care that they need exists; what is missing is delivery. The Department of Health must do better. Today, I call directly on the Minister of Health to listen to the voices of women across Northern Ireland, prioritise endometriosis care and deliver timely, effective treatment —”
“Women in Northern Ireland deserve an appropriate care pathway backed by proper funding and specialist-led services. We therefore support the call for the Health Minister to urgently consider providing a specialist service in line with international best practice. That includes excision surgery delivered within a multidisciplinary care model, which has been shown to deliver best outcomes. <BR /> <BR />As my colleague Alan Robinson said, we also support cross-border cooperation to share expertise and best practice and to improve access to treatment. However, we must also ensure that high-quality care is available locally, here in Northern Ireland. No woman should have to travel overly long distances just to receive the standard of care that she should expect at home.”
“In addition to the personal toll, there is a serious economic consequence. Without adequate support, many women are forced to take extended leave from work or, in some cases, leave employment entirely. There is an urgent need for better, more accurate and more timely information for women and girls in Northern Ireland. It is simply unacceptable that so many are left feeling anxious, unsupported and forced to conduct their own research just to access basic care. <BR /> <BR />Most women are not asking for very much. They simply want to be listened to, believed and respected. The DUP has consistently called for greater support for endometriosis services, menopause care and perinatal health services. Too many women report that they visit their GP fearing that they will not be taken seriously, and, too often, sadly, they are right.”
“Women deserve no less as they navigate what is often a devastating and isolating journey. The consequences of delayed diagnosis and inadequate care are clear. Long waits worsen health outcomes. They mean more time off work or school, more familial and financial strain and more invasive medical interventions. Put simply, the earlier that a condition such as endometriosis is diagnosed and treated, the sooner that women can reclaim their lives. <BR /> <BR />I quote the words of those who understand the impact of endometriosis best: our clinicians. The president of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists said:”
“We still do not know what causes endometriosis, and there is currently no known cure. That is no comfort to the one in 10 women who are living with this life-altering condition. Treatment can help manage the symptoms, particularly the chronic and often unbearable pain, yet it is wholly unacceptable that women in Northern Ireland continue to face such pain and distress without having access to the appropriate and necessary clinical services. <BR /> <BR />I cannot imagine what it must feel like to live with the condition and then to be told that the average wait for a diagnosis is nine and a half years. That is utterly unacceptable and intolerable. There is a pressing need for a UK-wide strategy: one that equips the NHS with endo-experienced surgeons, fertility specialists, mental health professionals and pain management experts.”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak in this important debate, and I also welcome the participation of men across the Chamber. Although women are absolutely affected by this condition, it is really important that it not be seen as a women's issue for women to deal with. It is a problem for every one of us, and we should all take responsibility. I therefore welcome the participation of men in the debate. <BR /> <BR />Women do not have it easy throughout their physical lives, from periods and infertility to childbirth and menopause, and everything in between. The very least that women deserve is to be able to access appropriate, timely, compassionate healthcare when they need it most. <BR /> <BR />Endometriosis is a profoundly painful and debilitating disease that can significantly limit mobility and affect vital organs. The reality is stark.”
“I welcome the vital work that the Minister is undertaking to provide support to local communities. Will he outline how his Northern Ireland community infrastructure fund can impact on rural communities? Has the AERA Minister shown his support?”
“A lot of people rely on that service. I would like to see more community transport across Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />The reinstatement and extension of the Knockmore line to Belfast International Airport would not just be a transport project; it would be an investment in our future. I, for one, would dearly like to see it come to fruition.”
“There is a great opportunity here to make environmental improvements too. <BR /> <BR />We have to consider the social benefits that enhanced public transport access will provide. It is about greater mobility for all. It is about accessibility for those who struggle with disabilities and who need accessible transport. That is another huge challenge. We have a large number of people with disability and accessibility needs. Those needs must be met so that everyone in Northern Ireland is accommodated. At this point, I will give a shout-out to South Antrim Community Transport in praise of the fantastic work that it does. That invaluable service plugs a gap in getting people from A to B for appointments and social occasions. The value for money that it provides for Northern Ireland and the Government is fantastic.”
“<BR /> <BR />The reinstatement and extension of the Knockmore line aligns with the commitment to sustainable development and the promotion of public transport as a viable alternative to car travel. We are all aware that it is not that easy to just ditch the car and commit to public transport — I wish that I could do that, because I love the train and the bus — as the availability and frequency of services are often an issue when trying to get from A to B. Even the taxi industry struggles to cope with the amount of traffic that we have today. <BR /> <BR />We are aware of the controversial environmental targets that the Assembly set itself. Some of us would argue that those goals are not achievable or realistic. However, it is important that we do what we can in that regard when opportunities arise, while fostering economic growth.”
“Thank you. I could not agree more. <BR /> <BR />We want to see that provision. There are enough people, and there is enough extra usage, to justify the link. We need to consider all options to improve the connectivity. A link from Ballymartin park-and-ride to the rail network is another potential opportunity. Ballymartin park-and-ride has been a great success, and we want to see more creative and ambitious planning. We know that the projects are very costly and take time to deliver. I am glad that the Minister is here to listen to the debate, and I appreciate her time this evening. I would welcome an update from the Minister on future provision, which is badly needed.”
“The links are very important. It is about investing in our economy and the well-being of our citizens. We know that passenger figures at the airport continue to grow. We want to maximise the tourism potential not just in South Antrim but across Northern Ireland. We want to see more provision for South Antrim. The growth in the number of houses has been mentioned. I am one of those who has recently moved to Ballyclare. We have the relief road, which is terrific. A lot of people, including members of my family, have come from places well outside South Antrim to live in the area. It is a very attractive area, and it is easy to commute to Belfast from there.”
“We know that, and the Knockmore line represents a potential solution that can enhance our public transport system, making it more efficient and accessible and potentially linking our towns and cities directly to Belfast International Airport. As has already been said, the airport holds numerous job fairs far and wide. It is continually trying to get qualified people in as staff members for all the various roles and the great job opportunities that there are, yet it struggles to retain people. A lot of that is down to the fact that people physically struggle to get from A to B to fill those roles.”
“I also welcome the opportunity to speak. I thank my constituency colleague John Blair for securing the Adjournment debate. As my colleague Trevor Clarke said, we have had this conversation many times in the House. Nevertheless, it is an issue that remains a vital topic. My colleague Steve Aiken also spoke so well. <BR /> <BR />The topic is a matter of great importance, and it would be a wonderful achievement to see some really ambitious plans come forward. It is not just about trains and train lines but about connectivity, growth and the future of not only South Antrim but the entire region. It is therefore vital. For too long, our transport network has struggled to keep pace with the demands of a modern society.”
“I thank the Member for her important point. I reiterate that we absolutely acknowledge the disappointment that has been expressed. There are others who are not so disappointed, but we understand that there is a range of views. We have to make sure that whatever we do is fit for purpose and meets the needs of the legislation. We will continue to listen in order to ensure fairness for victims and survivors.”
“I thank the Member for that important question. The public inquiry will tease out some of those issues, but, if the Member wishes to write to the office, we will ensure that he receives a full response.”
“As for affordability, in a perfect world, we would have unlimited resource, but we do not have that. We do not live in a perfect world, but we will, of course, listen and engage. We will watch as the legislation makes its way through the process, and the aim is to strike a balance that is fair for everyone.”
“I thank the Member for that important question. Yes, of course, we acknowledge that some victims and survivors were disappointed by the proposed 2011 posthumous date in the Bill. We are actively listening to their concerns, and we also welcome the Committee's views. There is no precedent for posthumous claims for an admission-based scheme going back to 1922, and it presents a number of risks. We need to make sure that we have a deliverable scheme that supports as many people as possible. There are important factors to consider, not least the need to strike a balance between the desire to make reparations for the past and the pressures felt by public services today that we are all acutely aware of, such as issues around health and education.”
“We are committed to working closely with others to deliver this important legislation, and there is an opportunity to shape it further as it progresses through the legislative process. This work remains a key priority for Ministers.”
“We are pleased that the Inquiry (Mother and Baby Institutions, Magdalene Laundries and Workhouses) and Redress Scheme Bill passed its Second Stage before the summer recess. Ministers welcomed the opportunity to meet the Committee Chair and Deputy Chair to discuss the Bill before it entered the Committee Stage. We thank the Committee for its work over the summer months. <BR /> <BR />The Department has engaged with victims and survivors and Committee officials in preparation for the Committee’s further evidence sessions, which are scheduled to begin this week. We acknowledge that it is highly sensitive and complex legislation, and it is important that people have the opportunity to provide further views through the Committee process.”
“As I said at the outset, the Bill is large, technical, complex and sensitive. We thank the Committee and especially the Chair and the Deputy Chair for their constructive engagement. We look forward to supporting the Committee's important work. Indeed, we express our appreciation to Ministers and Members for their ongoing interest in and support for the work of the truth recovery programme and the Bill in particular. Members will, no doubt, have views on the Bill, and, of course, we will listen carefully. I commend the Bill to the House.”
“Based on the Bill as introduced, the main cost scenario is £80 million, which can be broken down into three parts. Part 1 relates to the public inquiry and is estimated at £14 million. Part 2 is estimated at £58 million and relates to the initial financial redress payments. Part 3 relates to the redress service and is estimated to cost £8 million.”
“We hope that, with our effort to avoid causing any potentially devastating unintended consequences, clause 31 achieves a careful solution to that complex issue. To clarify that provision, eligible family members are the surviving spouse or partner and all surviving children, including a person who was adopted into another family. <BR /> <BR />I hope that I have outlined the key elements and the purpose of the Bill to Members' satisfaction. Before concluding, I know that Members will be interested in a summary of the financial effects of the Bill. Given that it provides for a demand-led scheme with limited means of control, significant uncertainty about the cost is inevitable. As a result, that cost could be much higher than the estimate, or it could be lower.”
“Following the consultation process, the Executive ultimately chose the date on which the inquiry into the institutions was announced — 29 September 2011 — when, arguably, the expectation of victims and survivors of mother-and-baby institutions and Magdalene laundries that they might receive a redress payment could be regarded as having been created. <BR /> <BR />The Bill will also provide for all eligible family members of the deceased to receive payment of £2,000 each for an individual posthumous claim. That was another difficult area on which to arrive at a conclusion, as is illuminated by the wide and opposing consultation responses. As Members will appreciate, that area is fraught with sensitivity and privacy concerns.”
“Unlike the proposed standardised payment scheme, which is an admission-based scheme, the HIA redress payment was harm-based. The date of 1953 was chosen because that was when state inspection records show that failings were formally recorded. <BR /> <BR />In the case of the proposed admission-based standardised payment that is provided for in the Bill, which, unlike the HIA scheme, does not require a person to provide a statement of evidence of harm, a suitable date on which to land was less obvious. The consultation provided an example of the posthumous date of 15 November 2021, which was when the then deputy First Minister made a statement to the Assembly to mark the Executive's agreement to the recommendations of the truth recovery design panel.”
“We acknowledge that that is arguably the most difficult and sensitive part of the Bill, and we appreciate that some victims and survivors wanted us to go back to 1922 for the posthumous payment date. For an admission-based scheme, that would be without precedent and would inevitably present us with separate, difficult decisions in other parts of the scheme. <BR /> <BR />As Members will know, posthumous payments that are available in redress schemes are ordinarily tied to a date on which a reasonable expectation was created that a redress scheme would become available, such as the date of a formal state apology or another date of state significance. In contrast, as Members will also be aware, the posthumous date for the historical institutional abuse (HIA) redress scheme was 1953.”
“<BR /> <BR />The proposed scheme will provide a £10,000 standardised payment for approximately 4,500 applicants, including the women and girls and their now-adult children who were born to them while they were admitted to a named, listed institution. It will also provide for approximately over 2,000 posthumous claims and a payment of £2,000 for each eligible relative of the deceased individual. It was essential to us that the payments not impact on anyone's social security payments, take into account other payments, require a person to sign a waiver or be subject to taxation. The Bill achieves that aim. <BR /> <BR />Clause 31 also deals with proposals for a posthumous payment.”
“That is an admission-based payment as opposed to a harm-based scheme. <BR /> <BR />At this juncture, it is important to highlight the fact that a harm-based scheme will follow in due course in separate legislation. It is also important to explain a little of the genesis of the payment. After much consideration, particularly in light of the length of time that victims and survivors of mother-and-baby institutions and Magdalene laundries have waited to get to this point and especially given the age profile of many of the birth mothers, the design panel made its recommendation in an attempt to ensure that those women would not have to wait another period of many years until the inquiry is completed to receive financial redress.”
“That is much harder to achieve than it may appear to be on the face of it and requires us to balance a large number of factors. This Part aims to do a few fundamental things. Clause 30 establishes an independent body to administer the redress payments. The other key element is clause 31, which provides for a standardised payment to the women and girls and the now-adult children who were born to them while they were admitted to any of the listed institutions between 1922 to 1995. That is an acknowledgement payment that has been designed to provide for those whose lives were impacted on by a system of institutions that were established for women and girls, admittance to which had gender-specific and undeserved shame and stigma attached.”
“Instead, it will seek to find out whether there have been systemic failings in relation to those statutory, non-statutory and other bodies or persons that were involved in the pathways and practices of those women and girls, and their now-adult children, into and out of the institutions and places to which the evidence points. Ultimately, the inquiry's examination of the facts and testimonies that are provided to it will seek to establish what happened, why it happened and who was responsible. <BR /> <BR />I turn to the second Part of the Bill. At its core, the first redress scheme is designed to provide redress, on a common basis and in a simple way, to a large number of people who were admitted to named institutions from 1922 to 1995.”
“Clause 16 will give the inquiry the power to compel evidence. The absence of such a power would, of course, frustrate the work of the inquiry. <BR /> <BR />It is important to note that the inquiry is designed to be inquisitorial, as opposed to adversarial. In practice, that means that victims and survivors and others will not be subject to cross-examination. It should be emphasised that the PSNI's criminal investigation remains open and that the inquiry will, of course, have important disclosure protocols with the Police Service of Northern Ireland and the Public Prosecution Service (PPS). The inquiry cannot, however, determine civil or criminal liability.”
“The clauses outline a separate process for finalising the terms of reference, which will be informed through consultation with the inquiry's chair, and consideration of the findings and recommendations of the independent panel, which are due to be received later this year. <BR /> <BR />The Bill provides for a human rights-centred investigation and process for all participants, which is to be based on the PANEL principles: participation, accountability, non-discrimination, empowerment and legality. To support those important principles, clause 10 provides the chair of the inquiry with the power to create a victim/survivor advisory panel. As I said, that will provide a voice for victims and survivors at the centre of the investigation. <BR /> <BR />I wish to highlight another important power.”
“The first Part deals with establishing the inquiry, the second with the initial redress scheme and the third with more general matters. The first 29 clauses relate to the inquiry, and many are similar to those in the Inquiries Act 2005. There are five clauses that are more specific to this inquiry, namely clauses 1 to 4 and clause 10. <BR /> <BR />Clause 1 outlines the time period that is to be covered — 1922 to 1995 — but, importantly, has the flexibility to cover the effects up to today. <BR /> <BR />Clauses 2, 3 and 4 establish a framework for the inquiry and propose key things that must be in the inquiry's terms of reference.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Department of Health, adoption agencies and some members of the consultation forum worked collaboratively to improve adoption practice guidance. Since its implementation, the feedback from many victims and survivors has been that significant progress has been made, which, in turn, has reduced the difficulties that were experienced. We know, however, that much more work remains to be done in that area. I could talk for much longer about achievements to date, but I know that the House is keen that I outline the key elements of the Bill, and I hope that doing so will help to inform the debate. <BR /> <BR />I will outline some key elements of the Bill. The Bill comprises 47 clauses, four schedules and three Parts.”
“The 10-person independent panel, which includes victim and survivor representatives, has received positive feedback for the meaningful way in which victims and survivors have been able to provide oral testimony in an environment that is more supportive and less inquisitorial than that of a statutory inquiry. <BR /> <BR />Another key area of work, which will hopefully pay dividends for those who engage with the upcoming inquiry, has involved the Preservation of Documents (Historical Institutions) Act (Northern Ireland) 2022. That has helped us to identify over 4,500 private records and to digitise many of them. That was done in collaboration with the institutions, the Public Record Office of Northern Ireland (PRONI) and the independent panel.”
“<BR /> <BR />As I mentioned, the Department also established an independent panel in April 2023 to initiate the first stage of the investigation, and it is due to report at the end of the year.”
“<BR /> <BR />Before I explain the Bill's key elements, it would be remiss of me to neglect to mention a few of the other key recommendations that have been implemented, as they will support the inquiry's work and hopefully improve the lives of those affected to a greater or lesser extent or at least make victims and survivors' engagement with the inquiry that bit easier. In addition, we have worked with our partners in the Victims and Survivors Service (VSS), WAVE Trauma Centre and Adopt NI to establish specialised, bespoke and co-designed support services for those affected. Those services have supported approximately 400 victims and survivors to date.”
“Importantly, they identified the need to recognise and support victims and survivors from the start of the process. <BR /> <BR />One of the key recommendations was to establish a statutory inquiry and redress service, and bespoke primary legislation was required to put both in place, which brings us to the Bill before us today. The Bill is the result of much work over the past couple of years, and we hope that it will achieve the implementation of many of the ambitious recommendations made by the truth recovery design panel.”
“<BR /> <BR />In summary, the research lifted the veil on the hidden experiences of women and girls and their children, who are now adults. Their experiences were affected by decisions taken by the state, by the Churches, by others and by society in general over many decades up until the 1990s. Testimonies collected as part of the research have been built on and will be enriched by the first stage of the investigation by the independent panel that was established in April 2023. <BR /> <BR />The Executive agreed the report's implementation in November 2021. Since then, the Executive Office's truth recovery programme has engaged with victims and survivors to implement the report's five key recommendations. As I have already said, the truth recovery design panel's proposals were groundbreaking and novel.”
“Just seven months later, in October 2021, the truth recovery design panel published its findings in a report that shone a light on the shameful circumstances that occurred in the past and that persist, not least through their long-term impact, and identified the need for a transitional justice approach to remedy such wrongdoings. The panel recommended an integrated truth investigation of issues in mother-and-baby institutions, Magdalene laundries and workhouses. In addition, it identified the need to examine their pathways and practices, as it was those practices that led to women and girls moving into and out of the institutions. It also identified a number of related institutions, such as baby homes and private nursing homes and cross-border and international transfers of children and women.”
“<BR /> <BR />In January 2021, following the publication of research jointly conducted by Queen's University and Ulster University, the Executive agreed to undertake an independent investigation of the institutions. Although the research revealed some of the horrendous experiences of women and girls and their children who were admitted to institutions over many decades up until the late 1990s, it also left many unanswered questions. <BR /> <BR />In March 2021, the Health Minister took the lead and established a truth recovery design panel, which was tasked with developing options for an independent investigation of mother-and-baby institutions and Magdalene laundries.”
“MLAs subsequently passed legislation to establish an inquiry to determine whether there were systemic failings by the state or institutions in their duties towards children under the age of 18. Crucially, however, the remit did not include the adult victims and survivors of Magdalene laundries. Given the age limitation, it also did not include the women in mother-and-baby institutions and therefore their children, who are now adults. <BR /> <BR />At that time, Birth Mothers and their Children for Justice launched a campaign to highlight the need for a separate inquiry. Since then, significant work has been carried out, and it deserves to be accredited. In 2018, on behalf of the Executive, the Minister of Health commissioned a team to consider evidence and to research the operation of mother-and-baby institutions and Magdalene laundries.”