Paula Bradley
North Belfast · Democratic Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“I am especially grateful to all the women who, especially in my first mandate here, were a constant support and encouragement to me as a new MLA. Nothing ever prepares you for this role, but many inside and outside this Building are the glue that holds it all together.”
“I thank them for their support, especially over the last week, with the phone calls, emails, cards and flowers, but, most of all, for allowing me to be part of their lives, sometimes at the most difficult times. Secondly, I want to thank my party, of which I have been a member for 20 years.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I will try my very best to get through these three minutes without tears in my eyes, though I doubt that that is going to happen. <BR /> <BR />I will begin by thanking you, Mr Speaker.”
“After much discussion with officials concerning the objectives of the Bill, the detail of an SMI loan, the process of registering and removing the statutory charge and how and when an SMI loan is repaid, the Committee was content with the Bill as drafted. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the Final Stage of the Bill.”
“I welcome the Final Stage of the Bill. It is probably the shortest Bill that the Committee considered, but it is no less important, as it aims to protect owner-occupiers in receipt of an income-related benefit from the threat of repossession.”
“I know that I have caused a few headaches over the past two years, but you have always delivered week in, week out and put the needs of the Committee first and foremost. You have made my role as Committee Chair so much easier. For all that you have done, I am truly thankful.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,102 lines we hold for Paula Bradley, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 7 of 23.
“Therefore, on behalf of the Committee, I support the motion.”
“<BR /> <BR />Committee members asked officials what the impact on Northern Ireland will be if the LCM is not agreed as quickly as possible. The Committee was advised that, if the LCM is not agreed, the provisions relating to the pension Fraud Compensation Fund will not be extended here and that it will be necessary to bring forward a separate Assembly Bill to ensure that the Fraud Compensation Fund can continue to function here. <BR /> <BR />In its consideration of the LCM, the Committee also sought the views of the Pensions Regulator, which advised that it had no objection to the LCM. To ensure that Northern Ireland members are not disadvantaged and to prevent the need for a separate Assembly Bill, the Committee agreed to recommend that the provisions in the Westminster Bill, as outlined in the LCM, are extended to Northern Ireland.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee was briefed on the Westminster Bill and the legislative consent memorandum on 27 May 2021. Members were advised that the Bill makes provision in relation to the Fraud Compensation Fund to enable the Secretary of State to make a loan to the board of the Pension Protection Fund. Officials advised the Committee that the money lent goes into the Fraud Compensation Fund and is used to pay out claims. Members were assured that the LCM provides legal certainty for schemes, allows fraud compensation payments to be made from pension liberation funds and ensures the going concern status of the Fraud Compensation Fund. Members were further advised that the LCM will ensure that scheme members in Northern Ireland are not put at any disadvantage compared with people in England, Wales or Scotland.”
“Due to the complex nature of the private pensions sector, the majority of bodies in that area, such as the Pensions Regulator, the Pensions Ombudsman, the Pension Protection Fund and the Fraud Compensation Fund, operate across the United Kingdom. Parts of the Pensions Act 2004 that extend here established the Pension Protection Fund and the Fraud Compensation Fund. The Fraud Compensation Fund provides compensation if a workplace pension scheme's assets have been reduced due to an offence involving dishonesty and there is no solvent employer to make up the shortfall. Members will be aware of the recent surge in claims to the Fraud Compensation Fund in respect of so-called pension liberation fraud. Without urgent action, the fund could fail, leaving those affected without recourse or compensation.”
“On behalf of the Committee for Communities, I thank the Minister for tabling the motion. I have no doubt that Members will have read the Committee's report on the legislative consent memorandum, so I do not intend to go into too much detail. <BR /> <BR />The Westminster Compensation (London Capital & Finance plc and Fraud Compensation Fund) Bill that is before Parliament includes provisions relating to devolved matters. The Bill was introduced on 12 May 2021 and is expected to progress quickly, with Royal Assent anticipated by July 2021. <BR /> <BR />Pensions are a devolved matter, but, in general, pension legislation here operates in line with corresponding provision in England, Scotland and Wales, in line with section 87 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998.”
“However, the Local Government Act, especially Part 12, should not be tampered with without full scrutiny. For that reason, we will support Mr Allister's amendment.”
“Those of us who were here when the Local Government Act (Northern Ireland) 2014 was debated will know how difficult and cumbersome it was, not least for the Minister of the Environment at the time, who may speak later. We are on dangerous ground if we remove something from that Act without full scrutiny, especially if it relates to the assessment of a council's performance. Again, unintended consequences were raised last week, so without proper scrutiny, we cannot agree to the clause. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 1 is on clause 5(2), which concerns the performance indicators for the oversight of councils in the financial year 2022-23. I understand the rationale behind the amendment, given the situation our councils find themselves in and the recovery, which we know will not be quick.”
“I know from the Minister and the Department that their intention was not to take away from the autonomy and decision-making of councils. It was good that the concerns of the House were listened to. I also put on record our thanks as a Committee for the briefing from officials on Thursday morning. <BR /> <BR />Moving on to clause 3, my party cannot support that clause, which concerns the:”
“I welcome the Consideration Stage of the Bill. As was said last week, there is a need for the Bill and, primarily, for clause 1, to allow councils to continue to follow any COVID guidelines and for councillors to have the opportunity to fully engage, whatever their circumstances. A longer-term solution should be explored. Mr Durkan spoke last week of a need to modernise how councils do their business. As we know, that is not within the scope of the Bill, but I look forward to amendments from the Minister at Further Consideration Stage that might provide for hybrid meetings to be put on a statutory footing. <BR /> <BR />I will turn to the clauses and amendment. I thank the Minister for following through on the decision that was made last week not to move clause 2.”
“People have to wait such a long time for their appeals. We know that the waiting period has been extended partly because of COVID, but we have people at home now who have been made to feel as though they were telling lies and that their illness or disease does not matter. That needs to change, because their illness absolutely matters, and we have a responsibility to tell people that it matters. Change needs to come about, and we need to see it now.”
“Where medical evidence is concerned, I know that, very early in the changeover to PIP, a delegation met Capita to talk about people with autism. If you have autism, you will not have medical evidence because you do not have a disease. You are not required to have a massive amount of medical evidence, yet those people were treated very unfairly when we first had PIP. <BR /> <BR />There is strong evidence in the ombudsman's report that things need to change. There are questions about Capita continuing in its role, given the many faults and failings that are highlighted throughout the report. At the end of the day, people's lives are involved. Those involved are real people living with trials and tribulations every day that are being compounded on a daily basis because the wrong decisions are being made.”
“I thank the Member for bringing the issue forward. I am sure that all of us could give testimony to the fact that none of us needed an ombudsman's report to know what was happening in the PIP system and its assessment system. All of us could wax lyrical in the Chamber about the many people we have seen in our offices who have been unfairly treated through the PIP assessment system. We could talk about cancer patients. We could talk about people with long-term learning or physical difficulties who, although their difficulties are never going to get better, were questioned time and time again through that system on their experiences and how their life was going to change. Again, it is no surprise that the ombudsman's report discussed inconsistencies and poor communication, because, as MLAs, we see the results of that day and daily.”
“I will say to Committee members that we might be meeting at 8.00 am for what are now five briefings on Thursday. Departmental officials are going to make themselves available on Thursday for further discussions on the Bill.”
“That resource was allocated to council reserves in March 2021. The Minister advised that the money could be used by councils to enable them to meet in person until the issues with remote meetings were resolved. <BR /> <BR />The Committee is supportive of the principles of the Bill and looks forward to its remaining stages. <BR /> <BR />I would like to say a few words as a member of the Committee and a member of my party. I understand that, by the removal of clause 2, we may expect to see further amendments to clause 1 that would allow for remote meetings in other circumstances. Ms Armstrong will certainly want to talk about that. <BR /> <BR />I know from speaking to our Committee Clerk that departmental officials will appear before the Committee on Thursday.”
“The Committee accepts the need for those flexibilities, but, as the process of audit is a key tool in risk management and good governance, we should naturally expect those and other performance flexibilities to be used with care and prudence. <BR /> <BR />I will finish by highlighting that the Committee was concerned about the gap between 7 May and the date of the passing of the legislation in terms of cost to councils, and it sought assurances from the Minister on that. Councils are having to rent suitably sized venues for meetings and AGMs in order to adhere to COVID restrictions. The Committee wrote to the Department in April to seek assurance of financial support for councils for that. The Minister advised us that there was an unspent balance of £35·8 million from the Executive allocation to alleviate financial losses in councils.”
“<BR /> <BR />Clause 3 would amend sections 93 and 94 of Part 12 of the Local Government Act (Northern Ireland) 2014 in order to make it clear that they are subject to a similar flexibility regarding audit to that found in section 95. The Committee understands that, in section 95, there is flexibility for the Department to determine each year, after consulting with the local government auditor, on which councils the auditor must perform a section 93 audit, a section 94 assessment or both. <BR /> <BR />The Bill would provide for where a section 95 audit and an assessment report is required. The report would note any use of exemptions of section 93 or 94 in order to make it clear that flexibility was used.”
“That would create an enabling power allowing the Department for Communities, by regulations, to amend or set aside performance improvement for the 2021-22 and 2022-23 years should that prove necessary during the period of recovery from the pandemic. Any regulations made under the clause would be subject to the affirmative resolution procedure, and the need for that set-aside of performance for additional years would be scrutinised by the Committee in due course. Also with regard to performance, the Committee notes that the Bill would extend flexibility to potential exemption from yearly audit and assessment by the local government auditor.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee is supportive, therefore, of the decision to set aside a number of statutory performance improvement duties for the 2020-21 year in order to allow councils to concentrate on providing essential services and support for their communities during the emergency. The Committee understands that clause 4 would make provisions to regularise that decision, as not to do so would leave the Department and councils open to potential legal challenge. <BR /> <BR />The Committee recognises that the recovery to normal, then future, enhanced performance will take time, and it therefore notes clause 5.”
“The Committee has engaged with SOLACE on a number of occasions since the start of the pandemic to receive updates on the financial and service delivery impacts of the pandemic on councils and their staff. The Committee has supported the need for substantial funding to ensure that councils can play a full role in the recovery of local areas in economic, social and environmental terms. In that regard, the Committee understands the concerns that were raised about the difficulties that councils would face in delivering performance improvement duties and continuous improvement in the context of the impact of the pandemic.”
“<BR /> <BR />I will not speak to clause 2, as the Minister has informed us that it will be removed in its entirety.”
“The Department alerted the Committee that this could be done only by way of primary legislation, and so we welcome the Bill to take that forward and remove the situation whereby councils have to incur costs in order to have the space to adhere to social distancing regulations, particularly with many AGMs being held at this time of the year. <BR /> <BR />The Committee welcomes clause 1, which will provide a solution to the issue, will remove the end date of 7 May 2021 in relation to councils' ability to hold remote meetings and further provides that regulations will continue to operate as if they had never been subject to the date restriction. We understand that that means that they will continue to have effect until the Coronavirus Act expires in March 2022 or until section 78 is suspended, if that happens earlier.”
“However, earlier this year, as Members heard from councils and local government officials, the Committee became increasingly concerned that the regulations would cease to have effect on 6 May 2021 and there was no extension in place. The Committee recognised that that would limit the ability of councils to fully function and could lead to delays in council business and prevent councillors participating in democratic local government. At its meeting on 15 April 2021, the Committee considered the matter further and subsequently wrote to the Department for clarification of the issue and how it was to be remedied.”
“Having supported the Bill's accelerated passage, I now welcome the Second Stage of the Bill on behalf of the Committee. The Committee is supportive of the principles of the Bill and accepts that it is required in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and associated restrictions and the effect that they have had on the local government sector. My comments will focus on Part 1 of the Bill, relating to meetings and performance. <BR /> <BR />As I stated earlier, the Committee was supportive of the regulations made under the Coronavirus Act 2020 to allow district councils the flexibility to hold meetings by remote means and to provide for remote access to those meetings.”
“<BR /> <BR />I cannot speak on behalf of the Committee, but I thank the Minister for deciding to remove clause 2, because, as a party, we could not have supported it. I will speak further about that at the next stage.”
“Committee members accepted that it was necessary for legislation to be in place as soon as possible to allow councils to legally resume remote meetings. The Committee noted that the Bill also proposed to set aside three key statutory duties of the local government performance improvement framework for 2020-21 and to provide an enabling power to allow council performance improvement duties for 2021-22 and 2022-23 to be modified to aid recovery, should that be necessary. I will go into more detail on some of that at the next stage. <BR /> <BR />While accelerated passage is never the procedure of choice, the Committee, in this instance, supports the motion. As the Bill is proceeding under accelerated passage, we received it in our pigeonholes only yesterday. On further examination of the Bill, we had some discussions.”
“Towards the end of April, the Committee wrote again to the Department requesting information on the detail of the Bill and querying the financial support for councils to enable them to meet in person in venues large enough for social distancing until the issue of remote meetings is resolved. In the middle of May, the Committee received a response from the Department outlining the provisions of the Bill. The Department highlighted the fact that the timescale might require the use of accelerated passage and that, even then, the Bill would not receive Royal Assent by 7 May. <BR /> <BR />That need for accelerated passage has come to pass. On 20 May, the Committee was briefed by the Minister on why the Bill was required to proceed under accelerated passage.”
“The Department's response to the Committee was that it had received legal advice that indicated that the changes could be made only by way of primary legislation and that it intended to bring forward legislation at the earliest opportunity to ensure that powers to operate remotely were extended by way of provisions in a local government amendment Bill.”
“The Committee was, of course, aware that, in April 2020, the Department had made regulations under powers in the Coronavirus Act 2020. Those regulations had allowed councils in Northern Ireland to hold their meetings remotely and to allow remote access to meetings, which included access for the public. <BR /> <BR />Earlier this year, Committee members became increasingly concerned when we realised that the regulations would cease to have effect on 6 May 2021. Although the COVID-19 situation is improving, we know that councils may not be able to resume full public meetings for some time to come. At its meeting on 15 April 2021, the Committee considered the matter further and subsequently wrote to the Department for clarification on how the issue was to be remedied.”
“<BR /> <BR />Amendments Nos 20 to 22 to clauses 43 and 44 are proposed by Rachel Woods and Kellie Armstrong. It will be up to the House to decide whether those amendments should be included.”
“The Department advised the Committee that the amended clause increases the time frame for appointing an independent person from six months to within one year and increases the timescale for completion of the review from one year to two years, with the inclusion of a regulation-making power to extend that, if necessary. A regulatory power has also been included to allow the time frame for publishing an action plan to be increased by regulations, if necessary. <BR /> <BR />I understand that amendment No 15 is mutually exclusive to amendment No 14. Have I got that right? I will wait to hear what Miss Woods says further to that. <BR /> <BR />The Committee supports the Minister's amendment No 16, which provides improved drafting of the clause in the version of the Bill as amended at Consideration Stage.”
“<BR /> <BR />With regard to clause 24, "Independent review of the licensing system and surrender principle", the Committee supports the Minister's amendment No 14, which leaves out clause 24 in the version of the Bill as amended at Consideration Stage and inserts a new clause 24, "Independent review of licensing system including surrender principle". The Committee understands that the amended clause has been proposed to ensure that there are no issues with its practical implementation, that it does not seek to reverse the agreed policy intent and that the Minister's amendments have Mr O'Toole's support.”
“The Department's paper to the Committee advised that new clause 22 takes account of a number of comments by the Attorney General that the Department of Health should not only set a minimum unit price for alcohol but prohibit the sale of alcohol below that price; that it should recognise the limited power of an individual Minister to introduce legislation; that it should take account of the role of the Executive Committee; and that, should it not be reasonably practicable to comply with clause 22(1)(a), it should provide the Minister of Health with an opportunity to explain to the Assembly the reasons that it is not practicable to do so within the timescale set.”
“At our meeting on 17 June, as I said in the debate on group 1, members considered a detailed paper from the Department that outlined all of the Minister's amendments and the need for them. The Committee was content with the Minister's proposed amendments in group 2. They do not reverse the decisions that the House agreed at Consideration Stage but refine the clauses that stand part of the Bill to ensure that they are legally effective and practically possible to implement, improve the drafting of clauses and ensure their enforceability. <BR /> <BR />The Committee supports amendment No 12, which leaves out clause 22, entitled 'Minimum unit pricing', in the version of the Bill as amended at Consideration Stage and inserts a new clause 22 entitled, 'Minimum price for alcohol'.”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. Are there any campaigns or anything that we can run that are specific to Northern Ireland, especially for the elderly? My mother constantly gets calls from Amazon or Netflix to say that her account has been compromised. She does not have an Amazon or Netflix account, but she phones me in an absolute panic after receiving those and many other calls. Are there plans for any sort of campaign? It could be part of an international campaign or one that is specific to Northern Ireland.”
“The Committee supports technical amendment No 23 to clause 48, which deals with the commencement and short title, and amendment No 24 to schedule 1, which seeks to clarify a concern raised by Rachel Woods that the policy intent on the sale of alcoholic drinks under a local producer's licence being ancillary to the main business of the premises was not clear enough. Amendment No 24 is technical and seeks to clarify that. That concludes my comments on the group 1 amendments.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee supports the need for amendment No 18 to clause 34, increasing the number of authorisations for special occasions, which was identified by Committee member Andy Allen MLA, who spotted the lack of a regulatory-making power to amend the number of late-night authorisations for registered clubs, as is the case with licensed premises. The Department advised the Committee that that was an oversight and that it would be rectified. <BR /> <BR />The Committee supports amendment No 19 to clause 37. It is a technical amendment that clarifies a reference to the Registration of Clubs (Northern Ireland) Order 1996.”
“Amendment No 6 corrects references in the clause, and amendment Nos 7 and 8 are a result of proposed new article 52E, which allows for taprooms and ensures consistency with the Licensing Order on the prohibition of consumption outside the area that is being licensed and relates to the protection of young people respectively. <BR /> <BR />The Committee supports amendment No 9, which removes clause 12, as amendment No 6 will bring it into clause 11. The Committee supports amendment Nos 10, 11 and 17 as they are technical amendments to improve the drafting of clauses 15, 20, 23 and 26.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee supports amendment No 4 to make an insertion in clause 10, which is on the licence for off-sales and local producers, to clarify that the general prohibition on selling alcoholic drinks for consumption on the premises does not apply to those local producers that have a suitability order and authorisation to do so. <BR /> <BR />The Committee supports amendment Nos 5 to 8 to clause 11, which is on the sales and consumption on local producers' premises. Amendment No 5 moves what was clause 12 into clause 11 and ensures that the Committee's policy intent on the use of occasional licences in taprooms is clear.”
“The remaining amendments seek to improve the drafting of clauses and ensure their enforceability. Clause 9 deals with the inclusion of cinemas, and the House will recall from my speech at Consideration Stage that the Committee had requested that the Minister consider including cinemas in the list of places of public entertainment. However, in the end, the Committee's position was to support the Minister's proposal to conduct a public consultation first and to then make regulations in the autumn. We had fully expected a Member to table an amendment at Consideration Stage, and the House voted to include cinemas, which is now provided for in clause 9. The Committee supports the Minister's amendment Nos 1 to 3, which improve the drafting of clause 9 regarding cinemas and ensure its enforceability.”
“The Committee was content with the Minister's proposed amendments in group 1, which do not reverse the decisions that the House agreed at Consideration Stage but seek to refine the clauses that stand part of the Bill to ensure that they are legally effective and practically possible to implement.”
“<BR /> <BR />Before I start on the amendments, I again give a quick word of thanks to the departmental officials for all their help throughout the various stages, and to the Bill Office and the Communities Committee team. The goodwill and good working relationships that were established from the outset between those teams have paid dividends in getting through to this stage as smoothly as possible. <BR /> <BR />At our meeting on 17 June, members considered a detailed paper from the Department outlining all the Minister's amendments and the need for them.”
“On behalf of the Committee, I am delighted to welcome the Further Consideration Stage of the Bill. The very thorough scrutiny at Committee Stage, the detailed Committee report, the willingness of the Minister to take forward amendments where needed and the equally thorough and lengthy debate at Consideration Stage have, no doubt, produced a stronger Bill across all sectors and groups impacted across hospitality, the retail and tourism sectors, local alcohol producers, public health, the wider justice system, young people and sporting and other clubs. Although the Minister tabled a considerable number of amendments at Consideration Stage — however complex that made working our way through the debate and votes at that stage — it does not mean that we will have a somewhat simpler task ahead of us today.”
“The Department advised the Committee that the rule will cease to have effect after six months unless approved by the Assembly. <BR /> <BR />On the basis of the information provided by the Department, the Committee therefore agreed to recommend that SR 2021/59 be confirmed by the Assembly.”
“Although there is no statutory obligation to increase the payments under the Act, the Committee is aware that the amounts are usually increased each year in line with the rate of inflation, as measured by the consumer prices index in the previous September.”
“The Committee considered the statutory rule at its meeting on 18 March 2021. The statutory rule is made under the Mesothelioma, etc., Act (Northern Ireland) 2008 and relates to the annual uprating of social security benefits, pensions and lump sum payments to increase the amounts payable under the Act with effect from 1 April 2021. <BR /> <BR />The Committee was advised that the rule enables lump sum compensation payments to be paid to people who have diffuse mesothelioma or to their dependants, where the sufferers did not claim in their lifetime. Under the Act, payments are made without the need to prove negligent exposure to asbestos or that the exposure occurred during employment.”
“When the Secretary of State makes an uprating order under section 150, 150A or 151A of the 1992 Act, the Department is empowered to make a corresponding order. The Department has no power to set different rates for Northern Ireland, however. This statutory rule is now made under the Social Security Administration (Northern Ireland) Act 1992. The corresponding Great Britain order is the Social Security Benefits Up-rating Order 2021, which came into force on 1 April 2021. In line with the long-standing policy of parity in social security, the order came into operation on the same date as the corresponding Great Britain order. The Department advised the Committee that the rule would cease to have effect after six months unless approved by the Assembly. The Committee agreed to recommend that SR 2021/82 be confirmed by the Assembly.”
“The Committee considered the statutory rule at its meeting on 15 April 2021 and understands that the order is one of a series of statutory rules relating to the annual uprating of social security benefits from April 2021. <BR /> <BR />The Social Security Administration Act 1992 requires the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions in Great Britain to review certain benefits and uprate them at least in line with the general level of prices. The Secretary of State, having determined that the benefits have not maintained their value in relation to prices as measured by the consumer price index over the period October 2019 to September 2020, has decided to uprate them in line with the growth of the CPI over the 12-month period, that being, as the Minister said, 0·5%.”
“I thank the Member for his answers so far. I welcome the date of 14 July for some easements to the restrictions on the general public in Parliament Buildings. I chair the all-party group on homelessness, and it would like to put an event in the diary. Will the Long Gallery and things like that be open for Members to book events?”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. Has the Minister looked at rolling out 20 mph zones further in residential areas? The Minister and I represent an area where many people do not have a lot of green space and children are out playing in the streets and roads. In the Newtownabbey side of North Belfast, there are 20 mph zones at Vaddegan and Merville, but it is guidance only. Will any of the guidance-only zones be legislated for?”
“<BR /> <BR />I finish by thanking everyone who has taken part in debating all aspects of the Bill tonight. It has been a long night. I also thank my Committee colleagues, who have done a wonderful job over recent weeks and months in getting us to where we are today. I say a special "Thank you" to Janice, Sean, Antoinette and Oliver, our Committee team, who have supported and guided us and shown great patience in the past few months with all our Committee members. A big "Thank you" to them.”