David Ford
South Antrim · Alliance Party · Northern Ireland
“All I can say is that I remember officials coming back into the Department and saying, "You wouldn't have been very pleased with what Trevor or Stewart said at the Committee yesterday, Minister".”
“<BR /> <BR />When I listened to the start of the debate, I welcomed the comments that Mr McGuigan made, but, as Alex Attwood said so forcibly, even when he intervened and asked what had changed, there was an inability on the part of the Sinn Féin representative to explain anything other than to say that there is an election in six weeks'…”
“<BR /> <BR />No doubt, what we saw from in/out Ministers not so long ago and the failure of the outgoing First Minister to accept her role when she was Minister in DETI to deal with the issue has further added to that.”
“There is an inability in all that we face at the moment to recognise the public disgust at the behaviour of certain people in this place and, most particularly, in the Executive.”
“On a point of order, Mr Speaker. In his question to the Minister on that statement, Mr Paul Girvan suggested that some judges spin out cases inappropriately in their own financial interests.”
“Less than the full truth emerged and facts were eventually slowly dragged out from the bunker, sorry, from Stormont Castle. It is a classic example of why people have lost trust in the way that this place operates; it is a classic example of why the ministerial code needs to be enforced at least as rigorously as we enforce procedures agai…”
The complete record
Every one of 2,469 lines we hold for David Ford, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 29 of 50.
“<BR /> <BR />In prison custody, the needs of the individual are balanced alongside their risks to create a dynamic personal development plan that focuses on improving their motivation and capacity to address their offending behaviour. Complementary to that ongoing work is the establishment of a partnership between the Prison Service, Belfast Met and North West Regional College, which will work to improve educational attainment and the employment prospects of prisoners.”
“My Department is engaged in a wide range of work to reduce offending by working to rehabilitate people who have offended in order to build a safer society. In September last year, I approved the creation of the new reducing offending directorate to focus on ensuring effective collaboration and partnership-working across the justice system in order to reduce offending. Establishing effective ways in which we can support desistance is central to the work of the new directorate. I will shortly publish a strategy that outlines my Department’s commitment to promoting desistance from crime. Research indicates that there are several factors that can support the process of desistance, including securing and engaging in employment, maintaining relationships with family and community, and having hope and motivation to change.”
“I am really not sure how that sits in with social investment bonds, but I will happily explain to the House that work continues between officials in my Department and community groups in interface areas in Belfast, Derry and the Lurgan/Portadown area, all of which is seeking to build confidence in the communities on either side of interfaces to allow the removal or opening up of structures. We continue to make progress in that respect with things like the longer opening hours of gates and the fact that there are now seven fewer structures under the control of the Department of Justice than when justice was devolved.”
“I appreciate entirely the point that Mr Wilson makes about Sport Changes Life. Of course, he should declare an interest, as it is based in his constituency. One of its key projects was done in my constituency and no doubt had a significant effect. The unfortunate reality is that, given all the other pressures on core services of the Department, I am not sure that it is possible to prioritise even such positive and worthwhile community projects as we look at the June monitoring round. However, I will certainly look to see how we relate not just to Sport Changes Life but to our other NGO partners.”
“My officials will continue to liaise with officials in DFP and elsewhere to further explore opportunities in this area.”
“I have had no meetings specifically on social investment bonds, but my officials continue to explore potential options in this area. DFP is working with Departments to explore opportunities to pilot alternative financing models for public service delivery, including social impact bonds and the development of suitable procurement models. Social impact bonds are indeed a means of attracting private funds to finance interventions designed to achieve social outcomes. As the expected output of a social impact bond is success in improving social outcomes, there would be a requirement to meet outcome payments to private-sector investors if outcomes are achieved. The next step for relevant organisations is to consider the outcomes and affordability.”
“However, what funding is available is clearly a significant issue for DFP and the Executive.”
“The reality is that, as I have just said — and I will repeat for Mr Allister — there are requirements in all three prison units. There is a specific requirement for a proper facility for women, which will build on the work currently being done in Ash House in Hydebank Wood and the step-down facility being built elsewhere on the Hydebank Wood site. <BR />There is a specific need for more residential accommodation and a plan for a significant cell block at Maghaberry. There is a need for a complete rehabilitation of Magilligan, which has, effectively, only one modern residential block with the rest of it still largely based on temporary buildings that were put up in the 1970s. All of those have to be considered together, and the Prison Service has a plan for phasing all three of those operations.”
“The answer to any capital programme in terms of things starting at an early phase and being considered over a period of years is that costs will increase. Part of the issue is because of the higher expectations of the facilities that would be provided. I do not have the figures immediately before me, but I will certainly write to the Member and give the current update on the figures. It is certainly a very significant programme, but it is required to ensure that Magilligan can fulfil its responsibility to rehabilitate prisoners and not merely incarcerate them.”
“One of the key factors in keeping the prison at Magilligan was to build on those local opportunities. I am pleased to see that we have made progress over the last couple of years.”
“Mr Ó hOisín is right: the Department was to engage with stakeholders, and it did so, including with local businesses and local councils in terms of providing opportunities for rehabilitation. <BR /> <BR />My understanding is that 30 prisoners from Foyleview, the semi-open unit, are out working regularly in the community with charities such as Barnardo's and the Riding for the Disabled Association, businesses, churches and with a variety of other bodies. There are placements with the health and social care trusts in Coleraine and Greysteel. There are also three current prisoner placements with Causeway Coast and Glens Borough Council, which builds on the work done originally with Limavady, Coleraine and Ballymoney councils, as they then were. All of these are good examples of work being done.”
“Mr Ramsey makes a valid point on the scale of the redevelopment that is planned, which will be over a significant timescale; potentially up to eight years. The issues, frankly, are that some residential accommodation is probably the most urgent priority, given things like the lack of sanitation. It is possible to do some of the learning and skills operations in less than ideal buildings, but, frankly, we cannot continue to expect people to live in temporary buildings and Nissen huts.”
“I certainly understand that it is important that we proceed with the programme for Magilligan. It is also important that we proceed with some of the capital work that is required at Maghaberry, including a facility for women, in the context of the difficult financial circumstances that the Executive, as a whole, face.”
“An outline business case for the redevelopment of Magilligan prison was approved by DFP on 9 January this year. I met the then Minister of Finance and Personnel on 28 April to discuss capital funding for delivery of the prison estate strategy. Until there is certainty on the capital available in the next spending review, it is not possible to give a commitment to deliver an eight-year construction programme. Securing the necessary capital will determine the timeline for the development of the new prison at Magilligan. My officials will complete the necessary bid to DFP to secure capital funding this summer.”
“As Justice Minister, I have to have an eye to the integrity of the criminal law to ensure that it is fit for purpose and not liable to dysfunctional outcomes. Neither should it be used where civil remedies such as regulation can do the job. Mr Speaker, I cannot accept amendment No 34.”
“It is those who have been complaining about the current position, whose successive Ministers over more than two years have failed to do anything to legislate to give a role to RQIA, a role that would allow it to carry out the full responsibilities that it should have for regulating every aspect of private health care. <BR /> <BR />There are certainly many strong views on abortion in the Assembly. We have aired them yesterday evening and this morning. However, any move to use the criminal law to create a further offence, as in the proposed amendment, is not the answer to the concerns held by those who argue for such a provision, and it is plainly against the concerns of those who hold the view that a woman's autonomy and right to the best standard of health service is key.”
“Mr Elliott, who is not in his place at the moment, raised the issue when he implored the Departments, and he used the plural, to look at the issue of regulation. For Mr Elliott's benefit, and everybody else's, it is not Departments that have a duty to regulate but the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety that has responsibility for regulations in the field of healthcare. <BR /> <BR />Mr Allister talked an awful lot about unregulated premises. However, the wording in amendment No 34 talks about premises that are not Health and Social Care premises. There is no case being made from this corner of the Chamber that there should not be regulation of private health care. We are the ones who have been making the case.”
“Some talked about just the risk to life, but that is not the position. It is slightly wider than that. <BR /> <BR />Our primary concern here should surely be that procedures in every establishment, whether public or private, be it the Marie Stopes clinic, the Ulster Clinic or any NHS hospital, are being carried out to standards that ensure the health and safety of the woman, who for reasons of risk to her health is faced with having to undergo such a procedure. That is a matter for the Department of Health and for regulation, not, Mr Speaker, for the criminal law. As far back as November 2012, the Health Minister committed to bringing proposals to the Assembly, such as those on the potential role of RQIA in regulating provision of abortion by private health care.”
“For those who have concerns about the way in which legislation was drafted by David Steel in 1966, I can say that I think that my proposals have considerably tighter regulation than those in what became the 1967 Act in GB. For my part, the need for regulation is clear, but that does not necessarily mean a need for further criminalisation. The criminal law on abortion applies equally across the public and private spheres. The need for another offence has not been established. Practitioners in private clinics are subject to the same legal requirements as in the NHS. It is worth remembering just what those legal requirements are. Under the current law in Northern Ireland, a woman must face risk to her life or serious injury to her physical or mental health, which is likely to be long term or permanent, before an abortion is legal.”
“Discussions at official level followed, and health officials were to look at providing material through their Minister on the options that impacted on the health service, but nothing was ever received by my Department. I then wrote to the Health Minister in June of last year, enclosing the start of a draft consultation paper from the justice perspective on lethal foetal abnormality and sexual crime. I asked for his views on dealing with that and the regulation of private clinics in a single consultation process. I did not receive a response. <BR /> <BR />Mr Agnew and Mr McCrea, and perhaps others, referred to the issue of lethal foetal abnormality. I can inform the House that I have followed through on the promise that I made, and I have completed an Executive paper on lethal foetal abnormality.”
“<BR /> <BR />I want to take a minute or two to put on record the attempts that my Department and I have made to bring some form of proper thinking and progress on regulation other than by criminal sanction. In October 2013, following a commitment that I made during the debate on the Criminal Justice Bill to bring a paper to the Executive, I sent the then Health Minister a summary of a proposed paper on options for abortion outside the state sector. It covered restriction, regulation and what was termed "regulation plus", which embraced ensuring clinical guidelines were followed. The Health Minister replied in November 2013, saying:”
“As I said two years ago, if a woman was being treated in the Ulster Clinic by a consultant and a medical and nursing team — she knows them and has confidence in them — when a critical incident arose and there were major traffic jams around the Royal, it would still be "possible" to go there. Therefore, she could not remain in the Ulster Clinic with those whom she knows. <BR /> <BR />A similar situation could happen if there was snow on the road between Ballykelly and Altnagelvin. Those are practical issues not considered by those who looked only at their concerns about the operation of the Marie Stopes clinic. I believe that the concerns that I raised then continue. Nothing has changed, and I see no new evidence being presented today.”
“We have just heard a reference from Mr Givan to the issue of whether life can be certified only at implantation, yet he believes that life begins in its fullest form at conception. That is an example of the ambiguity of that phrase, which has not been used in any previous UK legislation. <BR /> <BR />The narrowness of the exception to the legislation causes me considerable concern. It talks about allowing terminations of pregnancy on premises not operated by a health and social care trust in circumstances where access to NHS premises is "not possible". The usual legal provision in circumstances such as this is where it is "not reasonably practicable in all the circumstances".”
“I also talked about the importance of accountability, scrutiny and oversight, and the need for a system that brings accountability and oversight to the provision of abortions in Northern Ireland, as to all medical and surgical interventions, regardless of where they are carried out. I said then, and I say again, that these are important issues that need to be addressed, but not in the way that is proposed here. <BR /> <BR />This proposal, as was the case in 2013, still provides potential for uncertainty and confusion. There are issues that could be subject to different interpretations. I listed some of them before, and I will do so again briefly. One is the use of the term "unborn child at any stage of that child’s development".”
“It may have been extensive in comparison with what happened previously, but, in the context of an amendment that was added at Committee Stage — it was not part of the Bill that passed Second Stage in the House, so it had not been consulted on officially — I am not sure that it is as extensive and perfect a consultation process as Members opposite claim. I acknowledge that there was more consultation this time than previously. <BR /> <BR />Two years ago, I rehearsed what I believed were the very good reasons why this offence was misplaced and not fit for purpose. I can summarise those reasons again briefly this morning.”
“Like most Members, I shall now concentrate on Committee amendment No 34 to insert new clause 71A. It is just over two years ago that the House, as many have said, debated exactly the same amendment. Frankly, in my view, very little — actually, nothing at all — has changed in the intervening period to make me change the view that I expressed then. Nor, frankly, has anything been said in the debate to make me want to think again.”
“Similar provision was made in England and Wales in 2012. A key factor of the amendment is that the defendants failed to take such steps as they could reasonably have been expected to take to protect the child or vulnerable adult from the risk of serious harm in circumstances that they should have foreseen. At present in Northern Ireland, legislation allows for the joint conviction of members of a household only in circumstances where the child or vulnerable adult dies and not in circumstances where they have been seriously injured. Therefore, this amendment, together with supporting amendment Nos 71 and 74, will close an existing loophole in the law and further protect the most vulnerable.”
“This provides an extension to the Domestic Violence Crime and Victims Act 2004 to close a current gap in the legislation in cases where prosecutions for child cruelty or serious injury fail because there is insufficient evidence as to which member of the household was responsible.”
“<BR /> <BR />Amendment No 42, which introduces a new clause 78B to provide for the introduction of a new offence of sexual communication with a child, aims to strengthen the current law by ensuring a greater protection for children in Northern Ireland. It will also provide a greater cross-jurisdictional effect to tackling this type of abhorrent crime by ensuring parity with England and Wales and Scotland, which have similar provision to what is proposed today. The proposed new sexual communication with a child offence will criminalise an adult who intentionally communicates with a child where the content of the communication is sexual or is intended to cause or incite a child to communicate sexually. <BR /> <BR />Finally, on my amendments in this group, amendment No 48 inserts a new clause 83A into the Bill.”
“I am conscious of the fact that there are actually seven amendments in this group. I will first speak on the other six. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 41 introduces a new clause 78A to provide a minor amendment to the existing child grooming offence in the Sexual Offences (Northern Ireland) Order 2008. It is supported by amendment No 73, which makes amendments to schedule 5 to the Bill. The amendment will reduce the number of times that an adult has to have met or communicated with a child before meeting them, or travelling to meet them, from two to one, in view of evidence now that there are real dangers of grooming at literally one contact. The change will enable a more effective intervention by police in relation to those who otherwise could not have been prosecuted without a second contact being established.”
“We know from the limited number of inquests at this point, where the attorney requests medical information, that people are diverted in the health and social care system from the provision of services to their patients and clients to the provision of information to the attorney. <BR /> <BR />Given all the concerns that have been expressed on something that has not been consulted on substantively, it is difficult to see that we should move in that particular direction. I welcome the fact, however, that the other amendments in this group, most of which fall to the simple tidying-up process that the Department has been doing with the Committee, have shown, as the Chair said when he introduced his comments, a set of harmony. I trust that that is where we will be.”
“It is also the case that we are looking to a reform of coronial law in general. I suspect that it might well be best for the House to consider whether a review of coronial law might be a better way of handling the issue of the powers of the Attorney General to request information from medical authorities than simply putting it into a Bill at this stage. <BR /> <BR />There are also clearly significant issues about how far back things might go. If we were talking about somebody who died at the age of 90, there are serious questions as to how far back into people's careers they could be expected to answer questions. There are real issues in terms of resources.”
“In reality, there is very little on which to wind in this particular group. It is clear that the bulk of the amendments put forward by me, with the support of the Committee, are accepted. The only issue really is that of the provision of information to the Attorney General, on which concerns were expressed by some Members. I was amused to learn that there was a debate within the Maginness family circle. We should not all admit to problems in the family when we cannot agree a line, but it is clear that there was a finely balanced decision on that and that there are issues that perhaps need to be examined in a different way at a different stage. <BR /> <BR />It is clear that there are significant concerns amongst health professionals that what was being proposed was imprecise and did not entirely sit easily with their duties.”
“The current statutory provisions that allow the Attorney General to direct an inquest are set quite wide, but how the medical information to which the Attorney General would seek access would be interpreted is unclear. For those reasons, and in light of the Committee's inability to reach a consensus on the proposal, I do not support the amendment.”
“It seeks to amend the Coroners Act (Northern Ireland) 1959 to grant the Attorney General extra powers to gain access to health and social care information about the direction of inquests. I understand that the provision was discussed at length by the Justice Committee during Committee Stage, with written and oral evidence taken from the Attorney General, DHSSPS and the Health and Social Care Board. Despite lengthy deliberations, the Committee could not reach an agreement to bring forward the proposition as a Committee amendment. Given the lack of consensus on the matter, I do not consider it appropriate for the Assembly to agree to the proposal without further consideration and policy development.”
“The last departmental amendment in the group is amendment No 47, which relates to clause 82 of the Bill. Clause 82 creates a new right for defendants to apply to the court for an order allowing access to premises for the purpose of preparing their defence or appeal. The premises will typically be the crime scene and, in the vast majority of cases at present, access is agreed between the parties. The Attorney General has suggested that the power should only be exercised to ensure compliance with article 6 of the ECHR. This adjustment to the threshold for obtaining an order allowing access to property is intended to ensure proportionality and greater clarity in the use of the power. <BR /> <BR />Let me turn to the final amendment in the group, which is amendment No 50, in the name of Mr McCartney and colleagues.”
“Article 63N will now make it clear that DNA and fingerprints taken from an individual in connection with the investigation of an offence may be retained on the basis of the outcome of a subsequent offence, irrespective of whether that offence is linked to the one for which the material was first obtained. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 72 makes an associated amendment to schedule 5 to the Bill, which deals with transitional provisions and savings <BR /> <BR />Finally, in respect of the DNA aspects of the group, amendment No 39 inserts new clause 76E, which will amend the relevant PACE provision to disapply the general destruction requirements for DNA samples in cases where the material falls under the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 and is relevant in evidence in court.”
“As currently enacted, article 63G would not permit the retention of the DNA profile and fingerprints taken from a person in Northern Ireland on the basis of a conviction recorded against them for a recordable, non-qualifying offence in England, Wales or Scotland. Amendment 37 inserts new clause 76C to make provision for the retention of DNA profiles and fingerprints, taken by police in cases where an individual accepts a prosecutorial fine in relation to the offence, for a period of two years. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 38 inserts new clause 76D, which will substitute existing article 63N of PACE, which has been found not to have achieved the intended effect.”
“The first of the amendments, amendment No 35, inserts new clause 76A into the Bill to amend the Police and Criminal Evidence (Northern Ireland) Order 1989 (PACE). That is to allow police to retake fingerprints and a DNA sample in cases where an investigation has been discontinued and where the material originally taken has been destroyed in accordance with the new biometric retention regime but where the same investigation later recommences, perhaps because new evidence has emerged in the case. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 36 inserts new clause 76B to correct a gap identified in article 63G of PACE, which makes provision for the retention of DNA and fingerprints taken from persons convicted of an offence outside Northern Ireland.”
“The court, when considering the need for a search warrant, must be satisfied that it is proportionate in all circumstances for police to enter and search the premises in the case when the premises is resided in by a third party; that is, where the offender is staying at the premises but when it is owned by another person. <BR /> <BR />Amendment Nos 35 to 39 and amendment No 72 are a package of amendments associated with the new DNA and fingerprints retention framework as set out in schedule 2 to the Criminal Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 2013. Implementation of the equivalent legislation in England and Wales has identified a number of gaps in our provisions that require correction to ensure that the overall regime achieves the desired outcome.”
“The amendments ensure that the information is destroyed by the police once the offender is no longer subject to notification requirements but enables the Chief Constable to apply for an order to extend the period of information retention for a further two years from when notification has ended. It also allows the Chief Constable and the offender to appeal against a court order given to police to extend the period of retention or a refusal by the court to grant an order. <BR /> <BR />The final VOPO amendment, amendment No 33, is made to clause 70. That clause concerns power of entry and search of an offender's home by police that is needed for the purpose of assessing risk. The amendment ensures proportionality of any interference with third-party rights.”
“It also provides that photographs taken at notification are destroyed once the offender ceases to be subject to notification requirements but allows the Chief Constable to apply to the court for an extension of photograph retention for a further two-year period from when notification has ended. A power of appeal has also been included to allow the Chief Constable or the offender to appeal against a court order given to police to extend the period of retention or a refusal by the court to grant an order. <BR /> <BR />Amendment Nos 31 and 32 make changes to clause 68, which relates to the retention of information from other Departments and the Secretary of State, such as passport information relating to the offender.”
“Amendment Nos 30 to 34 relate to the violent offences prevention order (VOPO) provisions in Part 7 of the Bill and reflect specific comments made by the Attorney General around notification requirements of the offender and their compliance with the ECHR. The proposed amendments have been agreed with the Attorney General. Amendment No 30 makes changes to clause 65, which provides police with the power to take fingerprints and photographs of an offender at notification to verify their identity. The proposed amendment ensures that fingerprints are retained by police only if they are to be used to replace an existing set of poorer quality prints. In such a circumstance, the former set would be destroyed.”
“Following careful consideration to the views of stakeholders, the amendment includes an automatic referral for cases only involving offences committed by someone under the age of 18. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 15 makes an enhancement to clause 40, in the light of experience, to exclude a small number of applicants for enhanced checks in relation to home-based positions from the update service so as to avoid the potential for the unintentional disclosure of third-party information. <BR /> <BR />The final amendments in the group concerning criminal records are amendment No 18, which provides statutory cover for the storage of cautions and other diversionary disposals, and amendment No 70, which offers a small correction to amend a minor drafting issue in the criminal records schedule to the Bill.”
“<BR /> <BR />Amendment No 13 makes a technical adjustment to the existing clause 39 to make it clear that the code of practice to which chief officers must have regard when determining whether information should be included in an enhanced criminal record certificate must be published. Amendment Nos 14 and 69 introduce new clause 39A and schedule 3B to make provision for the introduction of a review mechanism for the filtering scheme operated by Access NI since April of last year. This is on the basis of legal advice that provision should be made to allow an individual to seek, in certain circumstances, a review of their case where a conviction or other disposal has not been filtered from their certificate.”
“The group relates to criminal records, evidence gathering and evidence handling. The criminal records provisions of the Bill and the proposed amendments make changes to the Police Act 1997 to modernise and improve the arrangements for the disclosure of the criminal record checks carried out by Northern Ireland's disclosure service, Access NI. I would like to take a moment to thank Access NI for the work that it does in processing some 125,000 applications each year. It has had a particularly challenging period recently with the introduction of a new IT system, including online applications from 1 April.”
“I am happy that we continue to discuss the matter for the two weeks before Further Consideration Stage to see whether we can reach a better accommodation, but what is currently before the House from the Committee — removing clause 86 entirely and amending clause 87 — would not be good law, and I will resist it as it stands.”
“Tales of Henry VIII, of malpractice in Westminster and of conferences held in Australia and New Zealand do not suggest to me that people have actually confronted the reality of what happens in this place and the necessity to have clauses 86 and 87 in the legislation not because we want to use them but because we might need them. The idea that we would put a complex Bill like this through the House that could be derailed and require primary legislation in a year and a half's time because people are unwilling to allow the provisions that are specified in clauses 86 and 87 causes me considerable concerns. I certainly hope that the Committee will not press its proposal at this stage.”
“That is an example of a Department that has engaged and has sought to be constructive in how it works and that, frankly, does not need to be hidebound in the event of possible difficulties coming up as we look at the extraordinarily complex issue of the number of existing Acts of Parliament that require amendment, modification or repeal. <BR /> <BR />That is where I think the Committee has got itself worked up into a lather about something that is entirely inappropriate for this Bill. It is entirely inappropriate for the structures that we have in this Assembly and the way in which we relate to legislation in this place. I wonder why.”
“I appreciate the Chair's point, which I was going to come to, about flexibility. The reality is that there is flexibility when Committees consider matters, if Departments put proposals before Committees and are willing to engage and discuss. Certainly, I accept that, at the point at which an order comes to the Chamber under the affirmative resolution procedure, there is no flexibility, but there is flexibility in the engagement that, I believe, has characterised the relationship between the Department of Justice and the Committee for Justice over the past five years. There is flexibility in the willingness to discuss different ways of doing things. There is flexibility, for example, in the way in which the victims and witnesses strategy was produced.”