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 8 of 23.
“I can absolutely see merit in looking at a review of the surrender principle, and that was in the Committee report. It is vital that we take that forward. His amendment No 45 is vital when it comes to data gathering. Data gathering will be required when we come to the review in three years' time for comparing the data now with two years' or three years' time, so I am in agreement with that. However, I want to impress upon Mr O'Toole that, as I brought up during the discussions, there are many reasons why our smaller pubs, not just in rural areas but in our towns and cities, are suffering and failing greatly. There are many reasons for that, whether it is the increase in people drinking at home or the lack of people using our pubs. That is why I believe that the Pub is the Hub model could go some way to reversing that trend.”
“I am sure that all Members have read the recommendations in the Committee report, so I will not go into any more detail on what is a fairly lengthy list of recommendations. <BR /> <BR />Finally on this group of amendments, the Committee welcomes amendment No 60, which amends clause 36 to remove paragraph (a) relating to sections 1 and 23, which are on the removal of additional restrictions at Easter, as the policy intent originally was to have the provisions relating to Easter come into operation on the day after Royal Assent to allow licensed premises to benefit from those positions in Easter 2021. The Committee welcomes the amendment. <BR /> <BR />I would like to finish with some comments as a DUP Member and a member of the Committee. First, I will comment on the two amendments that Matthew O'Toole tabled.”
“Amendment No 59 provides for new clause 32B regarding review of the implementation of the Act, and the amendment was kindly taken forward by the Minister, again at the Committee's request. Due to the potential breadth of impacts of the Bill on public health, emergency services, young people, the economy, tourism and wider society, the Committee proposed that a new specific review clause be added to the Bill. After discussions between officials and the Committee on the specifics and practicalities of the wording of the clause, the Minister accepted the request. I thank her for tabling the amendment, which the Committee is pleased to support. As reviews of the Act are of significant importance to the Committee, the Committee also recommended in its report particular areas that such reviews should include.”
“In its report, the Committee also recommended that the Department for Communities issue bespoke and clear communications, once Royal Assent is given, to alert the various sectors impacted by the Act and to direct them to the appropriate guidance materials.”
“<BR /> <BR />Amendment No 58 provides for new clause 32A. Again, that amendment was taken forward by the Minister at the Committee's request, so it is supported by the Committee. The Committee heard evidence on the need for new legislation to be supported by strong and concise communication on the new licensing laws and any subsequently approved codes of practice so that individuals, organisations and businesses know exactly what is expected of them. The Committee agreed the amendment with the Minister in order to ensure that there is a duty to produce guidance on the new Act.”
“<BR /> <BR />Based on all the evidence that it took on that, in its report, the Committee recommended that the Department of Finance lead an exercise to agree and take forward with NISRA a cross-departmental database that covers the range of societal issues that should be monitored, mainly alcohol licences, sales, consumption and harms in Northern Ireland. The Committee also recommended that it be provided with a draft of the Department for Communities' evaluation plan at the earliest opportunity and sought assurance that it will be able to feed into that plan on the issues that it would like to see included. Again, it is now up to the Members to decide whether amendment No 46 is the way forward on that aspect of data gathering for the annual publication of the number of operational liquor licences.”
“<BR /> <BR />Based on research that it considered, the Committee raised with the Department the lack of a wider comprehensive database on alcohol issues, as members were concerned about a lack of available centralised data on many of the pertinent issues regarding alcohol sales, consumption and harms in Northern Ireland. The Department advised that it is working with the relevant officials in its professional services unit to develop an evaluation plan for the Bill. The Committee understood that available information will be used in order to determine a baseline and any relevant information identified that will be required to carry out an evaluation in the future.”
“I thank the Member for clearing that up. To conclude on that part, it is up to the House to decide whether amendment No 45 is the way forward on that. <BR /> <BR />As with amendment No 45, amendment No 46 gives me an opportunity to highlight several data-related issues that the Committee considered in its work on data on alcohol and alcohol licences. The Committee was concerned about the lack of a centralised liquor-licence database, as members were concerned that there was no way to check for any imbalances in the range and spread of licences. The Department agreed with the Committee that there was work to be done to compile a full and accessible list of all licensed premises. The Committee thanks the Minister for engaging with the Justice Minister on taking that forward.”
“Also, in rural areas, if a local pub sells its licence and it is snapped up by a larger retail chain, the area may lose a vital community asset. The Committee was certainly supportive of a review of the surrender principle, and it recommended in its report that a balanced review of the surrender principle's impact on public health, the economy and rural and local community life should take place no later than the first review of the legislation, which it should form part of.”
“I am glad to be able to raise the issue of the surrender principle on the Committee's behalf, as amendment No 45 gives me a reason to do so. Although not part of the Bill, the surrender principle for licences was highlighted to the Committee in written and oral evidence from both positive and negative perspectives. Alcohol licences can change hands for considerable sums of money, and they are often viewed as part of the assets of licensed businesses. <BR /> <BR />On a positive note, the surrender principle provides some control over expanding the availability of licences and in normalising alcohol consumption, which are not possible in any other part of the UK. On a negative note, it causes difficulties for smaller retail outlets in getting a licence.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I am glad that he is explaining his points. Will he agree that part of the reason why we see the decrease in our licensed premises is that we need to do something more? They need to be something more, and the likes of the Pub is the Hub model would go some way to retaining our pubs, especially in rural areas, to be more than just the pub.”
“Without them, we might not have come to some of our conclusions. It shows the value of those people being part of our decision-making in the Assembly. Great thanks to the Education Service in the Assembly for all its work to facilitate that.”
“Those memberships are, on occasion, being misused to allow people to use simply the bar facilities rather than to try out the sports and leisure facilities, which was the intended purpose of such one-day memberships. The Minister supported the aim to deal with that issue. Amendment No 62 amends schedule 1 to clarify the policy in respect of the Registration of Clubs (Northern Ireland) Order 1996 that allows a member of the public to pay a fee to use the facilities of a sporting club for a day in order to ensure that it is not used to allow someone to simply use the bar facilities. <BR /> <BR />That concludes my comments on the third group of amendments. I will briefly reiterate my thanks to the young people for their evidence. The information that they gave us has shaped this part of the Bill.”
“The Committee also requested an increase in the number of award ceremonies in clause 29(3) to not more than three for young people who play on more than one team. Those changes are taken forward in amendment Nos 53 and 54. To allow for future changes, the Committee requested that the Minister table an amendment to allow regulations to alter the time period and the number of award ceremonies, if necessary. That is taken forward in amendment No 55. <BR /> <BR />To complete this group of amendments, the Committee is pleased to support the Minister's amendment No 62, which deals with an issue that came to the Committee's attention during its evidence sessions on the inappropriate use of one-day club memberships.”
“We sincerely hope that the Minister of Health will support the amendment and that it will give him leverage as he takes forward work in that regard. <BR /> <BR />The Committee is pleased to support amendment Nos 53 to 55. They cover requests that the Committee made to the Minister to take forward on clause 29, "Young people prohibited from bars", as it applies to registered clubs. Based on consideration of its evidence from sporting clubs, the Northern Ireland Federation of Clubs and young people themselves, the Committee requested that the Minister extend the time period in clause 29(1) and make it from 1 May to 30 September. That would cover the period during which summer training and sports camps run.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee understands that the Minister of Health, Robin Swann, made a commitment in July 2020 to undertake a consultation on the introduction of minimum unit pricing in Northern Ireland. We felt at first that that was not within our remit. After taking advice from the Assembly Bill Office, however, it was determined that the issue was potentially within the scope of the Bill, and, after considerable deliberation, the Committee asked the Bill Office to draft an amendment that placed a duty on the Minister of Health to introduce minimum unit pricing within three years of the Act's coming into operation. The Committee has no desire to undermine or take away from the work of our Health Minister, but we felt that we could not ignore the issue.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. The Committee tabled the amendment. We understand from our departmental officials that it could be included in the Bill and that we could compel the Minister of Health to introduce minimum unit pricing. That is why we tabled it. We understand that there might have been issues for the Minister had she tabled such an amendment herself, because that would have been one Minister compelling another, but we felt that we, as an Assembly, should ask for it to be included in the Bill. I know that the Health Minister is also keen to see minimum unit pricing put in place. I hope that that explains that somewhat.”
“The Department accepted that the clause needed further clarity, and amendment Nos 40 to 43 and amendment No 56 cover that issue. <BR /> <BR />I am pleased to support our Committee amendment No 44, which would introduce new clause 17A on minimum unit pricing. As I have stated, the Committee considered the Bill's public health impact and supports a balanced package of measures to focus on alcohol consumption in controlled settings. We simply could not, however —.”
“as defined as being someone with "parental responsibility" within the meaning of the Children (Northern Ireland) Order 1995. The Committee gave some examples of a child bringing a friend or a 16- or 17-year-old care leaver who has no parent. <BR /> <BR />In connection with clause 15, the Committee is pleased to support the Minister's technical and drafting improvements in amendment Nos 40 to 43 regarding the prohibition on self-service and sales by vending machines, as well as amendment Nos 56 and 57, which will amend clause 30 in a similar way for registered clubs. The Committee queried the use of honesty boxes to pay for alcohol in, for example, a guest house and wanted to be sure that the prohibition would also cover that.”
“The Committee supports amendment No 39, which applies to clause 12. Again, it was tabled by the Minister at the Committee's request. It allows for a child at a private function to be supervised by their own parent or by a parent of another person under 18 and attending the function. In that regard, the Committee also supports amendment No 52, which provides for a similar improvement to clause 28, which applies to registered clubs. <BR /> <BR />The Committee was concerned that it was potentially too restrictive to require an under-18 to be:”
“The Committee supports that amendment and amendment Nos 35, 36 and 38, which are improvements to the drafting of the clause. The Committee also supports amendment No 51, which provides for similar improvements to clause 27, which applies to registered clubs.”
“Amendment Nos 35 to 38 are to clause 11, "Underage functions". On the balance of evidence received, the Committee broadly welcomed the provisions in clause 11, which allow underage functions to go ahead in an alcohol-free, safe and controlled manner. Under current law, school formals in hotels, for example, must end at 9.30 pm, which means that young people often go on to unsupervised venues and parties where alcohol may be available. However, members were concerned that the clause did not provide for under-18s being on the premises, albeit in the process of leaving, after 1.00 am. The Department thanked us for highlighting the need for a very necessary amendment, and the Minister has taken that forward as amendment No 37.”
“The Committee's next recommendation is based on the feedback from our young persons' event:”
“The Committee recommends that public health messaging on the effects of alcohol misuse is communicated regularly as part of the liquor licensing system and as part of a communication strategy in connection with the new legislation. It also recommends:”
“They made many relevant comments. I thank the young people who gave up their evening to take part, and I thank the Assembly's Engagement team for facilitating the event. <BR /> <BR />On numerous occasions throughout the evidence, concerns were raised to the Committee about the public health impacts of alcohol; the potential for the increased availability of alcohol to increase overall alcohol-related harm in society; and the impact that can be made by controlling alcohol availability through licensing decisions. I take the liberty of highlighting the recommendations that the Committee made in the public health section of its report.”
“Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, I apologise for my little blip earlier when I asked you, never mind asking Claire McCanny, which vote we were on. <BR /> <BR />I start my contribution on the group 3 amendments by taking the opportunity to reassure the House that the Committee considered substantial evidence on alcohol-related harm and the exposure of children and young people to alcohol. We took written and oral evidence and research findings from, among others, the Department of Health, the Public Health Agency, the Institute of Public Health in Ireland, the University of Stirling, the British Medical Association, Assembly researchers, the Safeguarding Board and the Northern Ireland Alcohol and Drug Alliance. The Committee remained mindful of the views that it had heard during its informal Zoom engagement with young stakeholders on 9 March.”
“I ask you to go back to amendment No 15, which is an amendment to amendment No 14 from the Minister. Has that not to be moved by the Minister? Maybe ask the Bill Clerk's opinion on that.”
“Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, may I interject?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. It is about the issue that Mr Wells brought up about Bushmills. Bushmills has a full pub licence. It can open full pub hours if it chooses to, but it chooses not to. As part of this debate, we need to understand that many breweries, cideries and distilleries out there will choose not to avail themselves of a taproom licence. We can see how it operates in Bushmills. The inn and the distillery complement each other in that tourism model. The taprooms very much hope to complement their local bars. I know that you will speak about it, but when the representatives from Copeland briefed us, we heard that it is one of the local distilleries in north Down that very much complements its local area.”
“I look forward to the Minister bringing the consultation and bringing it back to the Committee and to the Committee making the decisions on how we go forward with the cinemas. Again, I ask that the Minister give her commitment to that in the House.”
“I call on the Minister in her contribution to reiterate that and to give us her word that that will go ahead, and I will give my word, as Committee Chair, that, when we come back after summer recess, I will ask where the consultation is and that it be presented to our Committee. I understand the concerns that our cinemas brought up, and I understand the product that they have to offer. The likes of QFT offer private birthday parties. Maybe those are fiftieth or sixtieth birthday parties where they show a movie and provide alcohol, food and everything else, and our cinemas are missing out on those opportunities as well as on conferencing. Our cinemas may not all avail themselves of the measure; it is only some that have said that they will.”
“<BR /> <BR />As our party spokesperson on issues in the Department for Communities, I will now make a few comments on Ms Sugden's amendment. I absolutely understand where she is coming from. I think that it was me who encouraged our cinemas to respond to our consultation. They came in and gave us a very valued witness session, and the Committee got to the point where it wanted to make an amendment for our cinemas. I think that our cinemas are probably better regulated than many other industries and institutions that sell alcohol. <BR /> <BR />I have to say that the Minister gave the Committee and me the commitment, which I am honouring, that she would do a very swift consultation during the summer period and that, if no major issues arose, the change could be slotted in very quickly in the autumn.”
“<BR /> <BR />In drawing my comments on this group to a close, I will say that the Committee recommended in its report that, should the amendments on taprooms not be successful in becoming part of the Act, the Department should proceed to implement the commitment given to the Committee to carry out the relevant research on taprooms and produce a report on it in the Assembly as soon as is practicable. <BR /> <BR />At this point, I think that it is only fitting that I pay tribute to the amazing work and patience of our Bill Office officials, particularly Claire McCanny. As we called her back week after week to provide us with a range of options on the issue, she and her colleagues rose to the challenge every time.”
“<BR /> <BR />Amendment No 33 proposes to introduce new clause 8B. The Committee is aware that local producers use occasional licences to run taprooms. As part of the balanced approach in clause 8A to support our local producers, the majority of the Committee was supportive of those local producers who gain a taproom licence having restrictions placed on their use of occasional licences. The Committee divided, with six Ayes and three Noes, on this proposed amendment. The Committee also supports the Minister's related technical amendment Nos 34 and 61.”
“That was a key driving factor in making the amendment that is proposed new clause 8A. The issues for local producers are now years old, and all our neighbouring jurisdictions, albeit they have different licensing regimes, provide for taprooms. By all accounts, those are popular and successful for the wider economy and tourism. The Committee knows that the local brewers in particular and perhaps the tourism sector will not feel that the proposal goes far enough to support them, and some in the hospitality sector will feel that it goes too far. The Committee felt that it really could not win on this one. As the Committee is supportive of its amendment No 19, it cannot support the changes proposed to opening hours for taprooms in amendment Nos 28 and 29 and changes proposed to the number of days a year in amendment No 31.”
“A balanced proposal was found, and that is what the majority of the Committee finally agreed on, with the mitigations of limits on hours of opening and only alcohol produced on the premises being allowed to be sold. <BR /> <BR />The Committee was mindful of concerns that the licensing of taprooms could have wide-ranging implications, some of which related to additional competition for existing licensed premises. Members were concerned that, although taprooms had been an issue since the proposed 2016 legislation, the Department had not included the issue in the Bill's consultation or done any of the extensive research that the officials advised would be needed before the Minister could consider recommendations or legislation in the area.”
“At its meeting on 3 June, the Committee considered the Minister’s amendments to amendment No 19 and agreed to support the various technical, consequential and drafting improvement amendments, which are amendment Nos 20 to 27, 30 and 32. <BR /> <BR />I am not sure that, if I stood here and talked for the next 24 hours, I could do justice to the amount of consideration that the Committee gave to the evidence and the range of amendments that it considered on taprooms. I am sure that other Committee members will say the same in their speeches. Some members felt that the Committee amendments did not go far enough to support local producers and some felt that they went too far.”
“Clause 8A provides for local alcohol producers to apply for a new licence to operate a taproom during limited hours — 4.00 pm to 10.00 pm — for 104 days in any year, with the sale of alcohol restricted to that produced in the production premises. The suitability of the premises must first be determined before the licence can be granted. The Committee divided on this, with 6 Ayes and 3 Noes. The Bill Office made the Committee aware that, if this amendment passed, the Minister would likely make amendments to improve the drafting at the Further Consideration Stage. However, due to the short timescales that we are working with and how close we are to recess, the Minister has chosen to make those amendments at this stage.”
“However, at its meeting on 3 June, the Committee agreed to not move amendment No 8 and to support the Minister’s alternative amendments for clause 8, which are amendment Nos 9, 13, 15 and 16. <BR /> <BR />During deliberations, the Department advised that the sample issue could be determined in regulations. However, the Committee was not convinced that clause 8 as introduced allowed for more than one sample to be provided and so proceeded with its own amendment. However, the Committee agreed that the Minister’s amendment No 9 reflects that matter. Supporting amendment No 9 means that the Committee will not move amendments Nos 10, 11, 12, 14, 17 or 18, which are consequential to amendment No 8. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 19 is the Committee amendment that proposes new clause 8A:”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. <BR /> <BR />On amendment No 8, the majority of the Committee agreed that clause 8 as introduced gave local producers more scope to market and sell their products than ever before. However, we felt that the clause would benefit from further enhancements for local producers, and so we proposed, through amendment No 8, an increase in the number of samples and the quantity of alcohol that local producers may provide as part of a tour in order that customers could taste a wider variety of product, with the detail being covered in secondary legislation, but, as a counterbalance to that, to limit the permitted hours for the consumption of samples on the premises from 10.00 am to 7.00 pm. A definition of "a tour" was also included.”
“Our Committee report perhaps does not quite do justice to the in-depth discussions that took place on clause 8 and the taprooms issue, as much of the discussion had to take place in closed session for progress to be made. We worked closely with the Bill Office over a number of weeks to flesh out amendment proposals on the thorny problems that we were working through. A very considered approach was taken by all members to the issues, and lengthy debate and discussion took place in closed session to allow all members to take time and space to consider all the evidence that had been presented. <BR /> <BR />With regard to amendment No 8, the —.”
“It just came down to some very balanced and difficult decisions.”
“<BR /> <BR />Before I go into the detail of the remaining amendments in group 2, which are amendment Nos 8 to 34 and amendment No 61, I reiterate the in-depth nature of the Committee's evidence and deliberations on clause 8 and on the issue of taprooms, which I will come to shortly, in amendment No 19. The matters were discussed over a total of eight meetings, and we devoted at least 10 hours exclusively to those issues. It is worth repeating that the taproom issue was the only one in the Bill on which Committee unanimity could not be achieved. Although the Committee tried its best to come up with a fully agreeable and workable solution, it is fair to say that all Committee members had a genuine desire to support local producers and tourism through the Bill without causing harm to other hospitality sectors.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Department sought legal advice on including cinemas in the definition of a place of public entertainment via regulations and confirmed that that could be done. The Committee then agreed to support the Minister's proposal, receiving in writing information that a public consultation could be carried out on that specific issue over the summer months. Provided the consultation raises no serious issues, the Committee understands, regulations can be made within a relatively short timescale in the autumn. We fully expected that a Member would table an amendment for the inclusion of cinemas, so it will now be up to the House to determine whether amendment No 7 becomes part of the legislation. The Committee continues to support the Minister's proposal, as I have just outlined.”
“Ms Sugden is absolutely right about amendment No 7: given the evidence that the Committee heard from the sector, it considered its own amendment on the issue and asked the Minister to consider the inclusion of cinemas in the list of places of public entertainment in order that they could serve alcohol. However, over a number of discussions with departmental officials, we considered a range of matters, including the increase in the number of licensed premises that would occur, the concern that no public consultation had been done and the fact that cinemas here, aside from QFT, are one of the few entertainment options for families or people who prefer not to be in the presence of alcohol.”
“Aside from amendment No 7, which is to do with the inclusion of cinemas, all the amendments in group 2 relate to the provisions of the Bill regarding local producers. The issue of the importance of local producers has increasingly come to the fore since the 2016 version of the Bill, particularly the issue of taprooms. Therefore, the Committee devoted a substantial amount of time to asking specific questions on the issues in its oral evidence sessions of all those who could be impacted by any decisions made in that regard, including the hospitality and tourism sector, public health representatives and a range of local producers, distillers, brewers and cider makers. <BR /> <BR />Before I go into detail on the amendments relating to local producers, I will cover amendment No 7.”
“While, as a party, we support most of the amendments in group 1, I draw your attention to amendment Nos 1 and 48. Following conversations with my Assembly group, we have agreed not to support amendment Nos 1 and 48. We are supportive of our hospitality sector and fully understand the impacts of the past year. We also know that the hospitality sector is key to our economy's recovery and hope that it will be assured of our genuine support as we move through each group of amendments. Our party will also not support amendment Nos 2, 5 and 50 in the name of Kellie Armstrong.”
“The Committee requested an increase in further additional hours to 104 nights from 85 for clubs, which, I believe, is fair and reasonable. Amendment No 50 calls for that to be doubled, which was not something that was called for in evidence to the Committee. On behalf of the Committee, therefore, I cannot support that amendment. <BR /> <BR />Finally, for this group of amendments, on behalf of the Committee I welcome amendment No 63, which adds a reference to Sunday to the repeals listed in schedule 2. The Committee was advised that the amendment is consequential to the amendment that removes restrictions on permitted hours on a Sunday in registered clubs, and Committee members supported it. <BR /> <BR />I will make a few comments as my party's spokesperson for communities.”
“I thank the Minister for tabling the amendments. The Committee supports amendment No 47. We will come to the other one in group 3. <BR /> <BR />The Committee also welcomes amendment No 49, which will increase the number of times that registered clubs can apply to the police for late-night openings for special occasions, as provided for in the Registration of Clubs (Northern Ireland) Order 1996, from 85 to 104. It is another amendment requested by the Committee that the Minister agreed to take forward, because the Committee felt that it was appropriate to bring clubs in line with the 104 nights on offer to other licensed premises. <BR /> <BR />I run the risk of repeating myself, but the Committee cannot support the further increase from 104 to 208 that is proposed in amendment No 50.”
“The Committee queried whether clubs should have to apply to the court before any work is carried out, rather than just advising the court when their registration is due for renewal. Departmental officials told us that there was an anomaly here between clubs and other licensed premises and that the Minister would bring forward an amendment. In addition, the Committee highlighted concerns over the use of one-day club memberships, which have been used by some clubs to allow access to their bar facilities and not to their sporting facilities, which is the intention of such one-day memberships. We were advised that the Minister would also propose a clarifying amendment on the matter. The Committee requested that those amendments be made. The Minister accepted both requests and has tabled them as departmental amendments.”