Stewart Dickson
East Antrim · Alliance Party · Northern Ireland
“Thank you, Minister, for your answer. Minister, you will have noted that the Government recently announced a VAT cut for some family expenses for a range of activities over the summer. That is perhaps a change.”
“Many do not know how to apply; others do not even realise that the opportunities exist. If the process itself is a barrier to participation, it is really not open to all.”
“I was born in 1950 in Thorndale House, which was one of the homes that is named in the legislation. I was born to married parents, and Thorndale House was a maternity home. It was where you went to have your baby in 1950 on the Antrim Road. My mum and dad went there, I was born and, a few days later, I left with loving parents.”
“I agree with Mr Brett: amendment No 6 is important because it will deal with persons who refuse to provide information or evidence to the inquiry. Amendment No 8 to clause 20 is a tidying-up amendment that will allow the Committee to make interim reports, which will be of benefit to the inquiry process.”
“That is why I want the inquiry to succeed and why it is vital that it succeeds. That is why it is important for us to see that cruelty in the full glare of a public inquiry. That is why it is important that the scheme goes through without further delay. <BR /> <BR />Finally, I place on record my thanks to the Committee Chair.”
“The Assembly faces stark choices, and agreeing the draft Budget as it stands is not a silver bullet, nor is it sustainable for us to continue in the absence of a Budget. It is vital, therefore, that we break the cycle of crisis and collapse that has been destroying our public finances.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,188 lines we hold for Stewart Dickson, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 42 of 44.
“The Minister has told the House today that other Ministers were not so keen to provide credible alternatives. Will he not simply agree with me that his Budget could have been substantially braver when it came to revenue raising? We are not just talking about water charges; we are talking about constituents who tell me that they are willing, in the circumstances, to pay prescription charges.”
“On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. Over the weekend, a Member of the Assembly, Mr Sammy Wilson, tweeted what I consider to be an offensive remark about the Assembly's Commissioner for Standards and also made a further offensive remark with regard to an international campaign, in that he described the Commissioner for Standards as a "jihadist" and he described himself as forming a campaign for "Je suis Sammy". I wish to report the matter to the Office of the Speaker for investigation and also to inform the Speaker that I have written to the Speaker in another place about this matter.”
“It is important that we recommit to tackling those heinous crimes and keeping them on the agenda in the public sphere.”
“<BR /> <BR />Notwithstanding our considerable apprehension about clause 15, we recognise the significant benefits provided by the majority of the Bill. It simplifies the legislative framework, enhances provision to facilitate the confiscation of criminal assets, enables the payment of reparations and enhances services for victims. For all those, Lord Morrow is to be commended. Those measures represent a step forward in our fight against traffickers and those who would hold others in slavery and servitude. <BR /> <BR />We also recognise that the Bill alone is not a panacea. Its passage must be accompanied by renewed support for our police, anti-trafficking organisations and others who provide essential services to those affected. Today is certainly not the end of the road. With the passage of the Bill, we will move to a new stage.”
“We must commit to revisiting it — that has been done — and amending the law in the future if that is necessary and if the clause leads to negative outcomes. <BR /> <BR />I am also concerned about the use of the tenuous and untested term "sexual services" as part of clause 15. As I outlined in previous debates, I believe that that could lead us into uncertain legal territory with other activities with a sexual component. I fear that that will also need to be revisited. We believe that clause 15 does not reach the standard for which the Assembly should strive in the quality of legislation that we implement. However, as I said, it is clearly the will of the majority of the House that it is included in the Bill.”
“There is no evidence to suggest that the criminalisation of the payment for sexual services in other jurisdictions has resulted in a demonstrable reduction in human trafficking, but there is evidence that it has put women in greater danger, with the purchasers more reluctant to report incidents of suspected trafficking or to give sex workers information that can be assessed and vetted for risk. I consider the real possibility that we are putting trafficked victims and sex workers in greater danger as a deeply moral issue. <BR /> <BR />The issue is certainly not as black and white as some would have us believe, but it is clearly the will of the majority in the Assembly to proceed with the measure at this time.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is a source of deep regret, however, for my party and me that the Assembly has proceeded with the inclusion of clause 15 on the criminalisation of payment for sexual services. That is not because our objectives are immoral, as some would try to portray, but because we have concerns about the possible dangers arising from the clause for those who have been trafficked and for those who work in the sex industry and have not been trafficked. <BR /> <BR />We have strong justification for our apprehension.”
“<BR /> <BR />Lord Morrow shares that view, and he brought forward the Bill to provide Northern Ireland with a robust legal framework for those matters, particularly the prosecution of traffickers and those subjecting people to conditions of slavery, the provision of improved support services for victims and the tackling of the demand for the services of trafficked victims. His Bill also seeks to achieve improved compliance with our international obligations from European conventions and directions. The legislation has evolved — dare I use that term — considerably since its introduction. For the most part, that has brought significant improvement, as Lord Morrow has worked closely with the Minister of Justice and the Assembly, as he readily acknowledges.”
“I rise to support the Bill at its Final Stage. We have had a robust and detailed debate on it in the Committee and elsewhere. I hope that Lord Morrow agrees with me that I have given the Bill honest and fair scrutiny through that long process; a process that he, the Chair of the Committee and others have referred to. <BR /> <BR />Throughout the legislative process, each party has clearly expressed its abhorrence at the subject of human trafficking and modern-day slavery. In a previous debate, I said that it is an evil and heinous crime. I believe that every person has an inherent dignity, value and worth, and I therefore regard human trafficking and slavery as a grotesque violation of human rights.”
“Finally — this applies to me and all Members in the House, as well as to all those who have spoken — it is time to stop talking about what divides us and to take some action to stop that dividing continuing.”
“That is why the departmental assessment is so important and why we need to have accurate information. It is only then that we can develop departmental plans to desegregate our society and begin to see the financial benefits of that. A robust, cross-cutting Executive could play a significant role in making our budgeting and financial processes sustainable. We often think of the consequences of the legacy of the past in terms of the human and social cost, and we should never underestimate that, but the financial costs are quite often forgotten. In tackling them, we can divert funding towards public services and economic development and to trying to have a genuinely normal and shared society in Northern Ireland. Tackling the cost of division is an important part of that, and I urge Members to support the motion.”
“It is scandalous that we have segregated, not integrated, education. Mr Kinahan made the comment that the jury is out on shared education. He must have missed the fact that the jury came back in with academic research last week to tell us that we need integrated, not shared, education. <BR /> <BR />The report, despite being rejected, is an invaluable resource. It estimated the cost of division at £1·5 billion then. We do not know how that figure has changed since. However, given the role of inflation and increased tensions, it is very likely to have increased. The current Budget black hole that we are dealing with should put into perspective the scale of the challenge. I understand that not all the savings can be realised immediately, but it is clear that the Executive must have had some plan to make a start.”
“The practical outworking is there on the ground for us all to see. It is a disgrace to think of the millions that have been, and continue to be, spent propping up a dysfunctional system in the context of the current closures of minor injuries units and the threat to, for example, the unit at Dalriada and the widespread pressures on our health budget. I accept that there are no instant fixes for those matters, but you have had the report since 2007. <BR /> <BR />The most obvious costs are the direct costs to our policing service in dealing with security situations, but it is also clear that there are costs to services such as our schools, health centres, leisure centres, local government and housing. There is duplication all around us. It is scandalous that we have in excess of 60,000 empty school desks across Northern Ireland.”
“An example from that report that particularly strikes us concerns health, where it is stated that the erstwhile North and West Belfast Health and Social Services Trust commissioned research on the physical location of service delivery. It accepted recommendations to locate new health centres in locations that would be acceptable and accessible by separate communities. That was written in 2007. I do not hear anybody coming back challenging that, yet the report was rejected. That rejection resulted in the development of four health and well-being centres instead of the two or, at the very most, three that would have been required if the decision had been taken purely on the basis of population, deprivation patterns and the services to be provided. In short, additional health facilities have been built to accommodate division.”
“John McCallister challenged those of us who are in the Executive on what we were doing. Reference has been made to the number of peace barriers and walls; they may have increased, but only one Minister has actually taken any down, and that is David Ford, the Justice Minister. <BR /> <BR />It was particularly interesting to hear the junior Minister. I thank her for her contribution this afternoon. She told us that OFMDFM did not accept a report that was written in 2007 by one of the world's leading economic houses. If you did not accept it in 2007, what have you been doing between then and 2014 to correct the report? What have you been doing to write your own report? It is a damning and scandalous indictment of OFMDFM that you took this report and ignored it. You have failed to challenge it, except in a soft debate here this afternoon.”
“Colum Eastwood told us that this was a sensible motion and that the Budget was an element in that. Leslie Cree told us that his party was fully supportive of a prosperous society. David McIlveen highlighted the cost of parades and the rights and responsibilities in respect of that and made particular reference to the role of new and emerging migrant communities in Northern Ireland. Dominic Bradley told us that no party denies the cost of division. Danny Kinahan told us that we need to find ways to forward shared education. Steven Agnew commented on something that I intend to move on to. He questioned what progress had been made in respect of the matter and spoke of the urgent need to move on. He also made reference to the Good Friday Agreement and made the very pertinent point that perhaps it was at that point that we stopped talking.”
“I would genuinely like to thank my colleague Chris Lyttle for introducing the debate and, indeed, all those who have contributed to it. For many decades, the Alliance Party has been highlighting the cost and the damage of division in society. It is not a financial legacy of just the Troubles and beyond. It has had a deep and lasting impact on the way society is structured and the way in which we deliver our public services. That is particularly pertinent, as a number of Members have made reference to, in light of the current Budget pressures. <BR /> <BR />Members across the House have highlighted examples of the cost of division. Stephen Moutray talked about the work that is needed to bring down barriers. Bronwyn McGahan talked about the cost of division in dealing with the past.”
“I understand what the Minister is saying, and I appreciate the constraints that she is operating under. However, remember, the First Minister and the deputy First Minister made a promise to the American president, and it was on the back of that that things were allowed to be moved forward. She has not come forward with any creative ways of dealing with this. In order to allow families and communities to share, you have to prepare for it. What programmes are in place to prepare for people who want to live in shared housing?”
“I listened to what the junior Minister is saying, and it all sounds wonderful, but when we cut to the chase and get down to reality, like recently when I questioned the Social Development Minister about Together: Building a United Community and the shared neighbourhoods that were announced under that scheme. I was told that there was no chance of actual sharing, because the allocation of the housing would be done on the same basis on which the Housing Executive currently allocates property. Therefore, there was no genuine ability under Together: Building a United Community, in those new housing projects that have been identified, to build that very same united community. There is no mechanism in place to allocate housing on a shared basis rather than on the current Housing Executive's plans.”
“<BR /> <BR />I particularly welcome the provisions on the appointment of an Independent Anti-slavery Commissioner, which will complement and enhance our efforts to tackle human trafficking, among other things, the functions encouraging good practice in prevention, detection and investigation, and prosecution. The provisions will help us to improve security and protect the most vulnerable. I encourage Members to support the motion.”
“I will be very brief, but it is important to note the important areas that the Bill covers, and, indeed, the complimentary way in which Lord Morrow referred to it. I particularly welcome the Bill in relation to shipping. I recently had to write to the Home Secretary about concerns that I raised about security at our ports and the frequency of inspections. I appreciate that the Bill does not specifically deal with that issue, but the extra powers to stop, board, divert and detain ships will no doubt aid efforts against serious and organised crime gangs exploiting the seas and our ports.”
“A week rarely goes by now when we do not hear on the news terrible stories of abuse. By adopting these legislative changes, we are firmly saying that those activities will not be tolerated by this Assembly or Northern Ireland society. These are important provisions, and I believe that they are a step forward in dealing with serious crime. I encourage Members to support the motion.”
“The Bill, as the Minister outlined, covers a number of areas from dealing with the proceeds of crime to the protection of children. On the former, I welcome the greater powers for law enforcement agencies to effectively pursue and bring to justice members of organised criminal gangs. Like the Member who spoke previously, I think that the operation of the National Crime Agency is a key part of the UK legislation, and our efforts against serious organised crime would be greatly aided if those who are blocking its operation in Northern Ireland were to drop that opposition. That would be extremely helpful to the Bill. <BR /> <BR />I particularly welcome the provisions in clauses 66 to 70, especially those dealing with female genital mutilation. This will help us to better protect the most vulnerable.”
“We really need to look at how the original problem that was identified can be effectively addressed. It seems more logical to reintroduce the prostitution element to give the matter more clarity. Otherwise, as I have explained, the legislation will increasingly encroach on areas where it is not appropriate or, indeed, deflect from the heinous and serious crime of human trafficking. This is supposed to be a Bill to address the trafficking and exploitation of human beings, not to legislate for sexual ethics more generally. If the amendment passes, we risk further losing focus on the Bill's primary objective. Therefore, I encourage Members to reject it and enable us to look again at how we can address the problem more effectively.”
“That Bill was not dissimilar to this one. <BR /> <BR />The legislation in Canada ran into big problems because it violated the legal principle that says that the law has to be knowable, clearly articulated and not applied arbitrarily. Can we be guaranteed that with this clause? With this amendment, we are potentially entering into unchartered territory. I am not sure whether the consequences are simply not appreciated by the DUP or whether it is trying to drag us back to a Victorian era in which we will all have to cover up our piano legs. <BR /> <BR />The reality is that this amendment could be seriously detrimental to the efforts of the police, the prosecution service and the courts to tackle human trafficking by opening up the offence much wider and diluting the effectiveness of the Bill.”
“<BR /> <BR />This highlights the type of problems which will inevitably arise when we try to use the term "sexual services" without a proper statutory definition. We simply cannot draw clear parameters of the offence. It might be useful to share an example from Canada, where the Supreme Court struck down its prostitution laws last December. A lawyer who was involved in the case said that:”
“However, it appears that this amendment would make their purchase illegal. <BR /> <BR />We could even go further: what about cases in which someone goes to see a play with sexually explicit scenes? Some people may go because they consider it art, but what about those who go to enjoy particular scenes for sexual gratification? If my reading of this amendment is correct, then when an actor or actress touches themselves in a sexual manner in the presence of an audience member who has paid to watch it for the purpose of sexual gratification, that audience member has technically committed an offence. For example, are we to have 'Lady Chatterley's Lover' banned from the stages of Northern Ireland once more?”
“I would like to hear Lord Morrow's explanation of why he believes that there are not, and will not, be unintended consequences. Once the Bill leaves the Floor of the House and becomes law, it will be a matter for the courts, and no longer this House, to interpret. <BR /> <BR />If we are going to legislate as loosely as to say that person A commits an offence if they obtain sexual services from person B in exchange for payment and that this includes circumstances where person B does not touch person A but touches themselves for the sexual gratification of person A, would that not also make it an offence to, for example, watch lap dancers or strippers or purchase a strippergram or kissogram for a party? While many would regard such activities as morally questionable, I doubt that many think that they would be illegal.”
“<BR /> <BR />I wish to place on record my wholehearted support for mechanisms to assist those who wish to exit prostitution and commend those organisations that deliver those services. I trust that the Bill will enhance those services. <BR /> <BR />Today, I will focus my remarks on concerns that I have about amendment No 10. Indeed, others have referred to it. The Bill as it stands does not seem to cover circumstances in which someone is forced to perform sex acts in the presence of a purchaser but the purchaser is not involved in any touching. This is a weakness. The amendment tries to address it, but while amendment No 10 appears to cover these circumstances, it also creates new problems, substantially widening the scope of offences, and will have unintended consequences.”
“The Alliance Party will support the majority of amendments in group 3, not because we think that the overall provision around the payment for sexual services is good law, but because we accept the reality that a majority of Assembly Members have made it clear that they wish to see the purchase of sexual services criminalised. <BR /> <BR />When we last debated this issue, we explained in detail why we do not think that it will reduce the market for trafficking for sexual exploitation and why we believe it could create a more dangerous situation for those who have been trafficked and indeed for those who have not been trafficked. Nevertheless, we are where we are. Our view is that we have to make whatever improvements we can to the Bill as it stands.”
“Indeed, it is sad that some of those who continue to support this Bill cannot bring themselves to support a key element of the necessary structures in our fight against what is an international crime issue. <BR /> <BR />Victims should and must be our primary focus. Therefore, I welcome the addition under amendment No 30 of further offences for which victims are protected from prosecution, including those in relation to false documentation. As I said, these amendments are non-contentious and will improve the Bill. I encourage Members to support them.”
“I also welcome the opportunity to speak on the amendments in group 2. Similar to the last group, I view these as non-contentious amendments that will help to strengthen the Bill, and I support them. However, I want to touch on a couple of them very briefly. <BR /> <BR />The Bill acknowledges the importance of cooperation with the National Crime Agency, and amendment Nos 4 and 45 are very important in this regard to ensure that any changes in the reporting structures can be accommodated. I think that it is also important to put on record my party's view that our efforts against these heinous crimes would be greatly strengthened if we were to allow the National Crime Agency to operate in Northern Ireland.”
“I appreciate that and the focus that is required. Therefore, does the Minister agree with me that this week's damaging exposure on 'Spotlight' of Members' scandalous expenses further detracts from that focus?”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. Excellent work has been done by two enterprise agencies, Carrickfergus and Larne. How will you guarantee that that work will continue once the local authorities are merged into one?”
“I see no reason to oppose them, and look forward to the discussion of the next group.”
“However, I would just like to point out again, following the Minister's contribution, that we consider amendment Nos 31 and 41 to be necessary, and we believe that "victim" would be a more appropriate term to use in clause 24, as it makes provision in respect of police interviews before the commencement of criminal proceedings. As the Minister has explained, however, we understand Lord Morrow's motivation behind those changes and do not intend to push those matters to a vote, but perhaps Lord Morrow can outline to the House to what extent he considers the use of different terminology from England and Wales in that clause to be detrimental, given that the intention of the Bill is to provide greater support to victims. <BR /> <BR />However, as I said, the intention of the amendments in this group is to tidy the Bill.”
“I also welcome the positive engagement between Lord Morrow and the Justice Minister to identify further amendments that will ultimately strengthen the legislation. Although, as has been said in the Chamber already, we have some disagreements on parts of the Bill, I genuinely commend Lord Morrow for the efforts that he has put into progressing the Bill to this stage with the Minister and the Justice Department. <BR /> <BR />As Members have said, the amendments in this group are mostly technical, designed to make sure that the Bill works as smoothly as possible within the existing framework.”
“I hope to be relatively quick as well, Deputy Speaker.”
“I will follow through on that. I am sure that he will agree — I hope that the Minister can address this — that you would think that, post the report and investigation, things might have improved. However, as recently as 28 May this year, two further failure-to-comply notices were issued against the home.”
“I very much hope that the Minister not only shares my determination to see the standards of care improved but wants justice for those who have seen their relatives denied the peace and dignity that they deserve at the end of life.”
“Given that Cherry Tree House continues to operate and no one from the home has been held to account for the incidents that have failed residents and their families over the years, how do you envisage the latter getting justice? <BR /> <BR />Last week, the Assembly had a debate on appreciating age and the importance of recognising the contribution of older people to society. In that debate, I said that our society is measured by how we treat older people and that one way in which we could start to recognise their contribution was to make sure that they had the best care in their final years. I view our response to this matter as a test of our resolve in that regard.”
“It is unacceptable that those who step forward to highlight shortcomings feel so unsupported. How, Minister, do you propose to rectify that? <BR /> <BR />That is my first question to the Minister in the limited time that I have left. I have other questions that I would like to put to you, Minister. What actions have been taken to ensure that all the recommendations of the report are being implemented? Minister, will you work with the trust to explore how, under its policies and procedures, a nursing home to which it sent patients could continually fail to meet minimum standards of care? Will you look at putting in place a new and more robust enforcement policy for the RQIA that does not allow for requirements to be restated over and over again?”
“The report includes a timeline of whistle-blowing incidents and makes clear that whistle-blowers highlighted issues about the management of continence, moving and handling dependent residents, the use of bed rails, the quality of food, poor hygiene in the home, medicine management, fire safety, shortages of staff, lack of staff training, poor communication between management and staff, and, most importantly in this section, lack of support for the whistle-blowers themselves. Indeed, whistle-blowers approached the Department of Health, the former Minister, the Human Rights Commission, the Northern Ireland Ombudsman, the Northern Trust and the RQIA, and still the whistle-blower who spoke to the review team said that they did not feel supported and thought that very little was ever done about their concerns.”
“If one reads the July report and the RQIA inspection reports, one will find a catalogue of disturbing incidents, allegations and failings. On management and care, reports found various failings in the recording of fluid intake, the keeping of care records, the supervision of staff and the provision of mandatory training, including the very basics of first aid. There have been numerous allegations of assault and abuse over several years. I have heard allegations of residents being shouted at and denied the right to go to the bathroom. I have seen for myself photographs and heard allegations of residents being forced to use mattresses with the urine of other residents on them. I could go on. <BR /> <BR />I want to raise the issue of whistle-blowing.”
“Were they not reading the RQIA reports? The report goes on to state that that is consistent with a particular trust policy. Well, if that is trust policy, it is wrong, it is weak and it needs to be changed. It is deeply disturbing that trusts cannot adapt to effectively deal with consistent failings in our care system. I really think that the Minister needs to look at how it is possible for trust patients to be sent to a nursing home that consistently fails to meet minimum standards of care over such a long period of time. <BR /> <BR />That the Northern Trust spent £653,000 of taxpayers' money sending patients to Cherry Tree House between September 2013 and July 2014 raises questions about how public money is being used responsibly.”
“I have said it before, and I will say it again: what does it take to line the ambulances and health trust staff up at the door and close a facility like that? <BR /> <BR />The Northern Trust in particular would have been aware of a number of complaints coming in over those years. Why did someone not take a step back and say, "OK; we are operating within the procedures, but clearly there are still problems, so we need to review those procedures"? The review team noted that:”
“The RQIA is singled out for particular criticism, and I would be grateful if the Minister would share with us what information he has about the steps that the RQIA has taken since then to comply with the recommendations. I must say to him, however, that I think that the health trusts — in the case of Cherry Tree, mainly the Northern Trust — have got away very lightly in the report. It found that the trusts dealt with complaints appropriately under current procedures, but there is a question to be asked if a nursing home that they send their patients to consistently fails to comply with minimum standards of care over a sustained period of time. Does that not suggest that there might be something wrong with the procedures? How can a facility like that be allowed to keep operating in that way?”
“<BR /> <BR />The review team also said that, under current procedures, it would have expected enforcement action to have been taken following an inspection in August 2009, which showed that Cherry Tree had taken little or no action to comply with requirements and recommendations from previous inspections. It strongly implied the same following an inspection in June 2011. A final important finding was that families were unclear about the roles and responsibilities of RQIA and the health trust, and about how to properly engage with the complaints procedure. <BR /> <BR />It is a damning report. That is reflected not only in the comments throughout but in the numerous recommendations.”
“Indeed, in one incident, the RQIA received information on the morning of an inspection that pages referring to serious shortcomings had been ripped from Cherry Tree's communications book, an important document in every nursing home, yet there was no evidence of the book having been inspected. <BR /> <BR />The report also found that, in a number of incidents, the RQIA relied on the home to provide reassurance that issues had been addressed, despite years of concern. It found that inspection reports did not provide supporting evidence to show that compliance had been achieved or sustained. Minimum standards on continence, a frequently raised issue of concern, were never examined by RQIA.”
“I really appreciate that. <BR /> <BR />Despite its shortcomings, the report came to some disturbing but important conclusions and found that, in the period examined — a long period from 2005 to 2013 — Cherry Tree House consistently failed to comply with the minimum standards of care. There was a cyclical scenario of quality improvement plans being made but not being acted on. There was a consistent failure to address the Regulation and Quality Improvement Authority (RQIA) requirements and recommendations, with some being restated up to seven times. <BR /> <BR />The RQIA inspectors mostly stuck rigidly to inspection plans, did not act on their own initiative and did not act to investigate recurrent issues, recent complaints or matters on which they had been given intelligence during inspections.”