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 43 of 50.
“I thank the three Members who contributed to the debate and, as I said earlier, the Justice Committee and the Executive for their support and consideration of these issues. <BR /> <BR />I should particularly highlight the fact that, I believe, Mr McCartney made his first formal response to a ministerial proposal as vice Chair of the Committee, and his support is therefore particularly welcome on these issues. We normally hear him only second; on this occasion, we heard him first. Both he and Mr Dickson gave fulsome support for the proposals that are before us. <BR /> <BR />Really the only issue that was raised was that raised by Mr Wilson when he quoted me as having said, "as far as possible".”
“As we have seen with the Human Trafficking and Exploitation (Further Provisions and Support for Victims) Bill, there are considerable complications in managing the combination of reserved and devolved measures in legislating both at Westminster and in this House on the same general subject. I appreciate that the Assembly's preference is to legislate on Northern Ireland matters where possible and, indeed, that would be my own preference. However, in this instance, for the reasons I have outlined, with the support of the Executive and the Justice Committee, I ask that the Assembly supports the terms of this legislative consent motion.”
“<BR /> <BR />Thirdly, as well as that policy reason, there are timing factors. The nature of the provisions are such that it will be important for judicial and law enforcement consistency for them to come into force as early as possible and at the same time. Given the current demands on the legislative programme, the earliest an Assembly Bill could be introduced to achieve the same ends would be 2016. It would, therefore, be to our great advantage if we were to implement these provisions in a more timely fashion. <BR /> <BR />Finally, there are procedural advantages.”
“<BR /> <BR />Finally, there is the issue of paedophile manuals. A new offence aims to criminalise the possession of material containing practical advice on how to commit a sexual offence against a child. That would deal with a gap in the law. <BR /> <BR />There are a number of reasons why I am asking for legislative consent for these proposals. First, those I have consulted, including the police and the Public Prosecution Service, have said the proposals would be beneficial and that they would welcome them. Secondly, the crimes being addressed by the Bill are those that cross jurisdictions and therefore need to be tackled in, as far as possible, a consistent fashion across the United Kingdom. Organised crime knows no boundaries and needs to be addressed in a combined, joined-up way.”
“These cover the provision of anonymity for victims; the introduction of an offence of failure to protect for parents; and the introduction of female genital mutilation (FGM) protection orders, which can contain prohibitions, restrictions or requirements that the court considers appropriate to secure the health, safety and well-being of the girl. These protection orders are a civil procedure and so fall to the Finance and Personnel Minister, who has given his full support to the proposal. The Bill will also extend the prosecution of FGM offences committed outside the United Kingdom to include people habitually resident in the UK, whether as perpetrator or victim. A further proposal regarding mandatory reporting is still under local consideration across a number of interested Departments.”
“<BR /> <BR />Secondly, the Bill proposes to consolidate the financial reporting order within the serious crime prevention order (SCPO), increase the penalty for failure to comply and extend the time limit and range of serious offences that can be caught. <BR /> <BR />Thirdly, female genital mutilation has been an offence since the introduction of the Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003. The Bill's provisions introduce a number of additional and new offences as part of a general move to strengthen the law on that crime across the United Kingdom.”
“The Serious Crime Bill deals with a wide range of matters. A number of the issues require legislative consent if they are to be extended to Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />First, there are provisions on the proceeds-of-crime legislation. These proposals are not a fundamental change; rather, they are a tightening of aspects of the current system so that it operates as originally intended. Extension to Northern Ireland would ensure consistency, as far as possible, in the operation of this complex legislation. At the request of the Northern Ireland Executive, the Home Office proposes to add to these amendments by introducing a statutory protection regarding proportionality in calculating the amount of a confiscation order.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is time that we had a proper strategic rethink of the needs of Northern Ireland to best meet the needs of this community, the needs of our economy and the needs of our society in the future and not, as currently seems to be the case, Arc21 being forced down the route of the only option that it sees, when it is not the proper option either for Mallusk or for Northern Ireland.”
“<BR /> <BR />We may not be sure of exactly what the best possible option is at this stage, but it appears to me that emerging now quite clearly is that the unfortunate way that Arc21 was forced by a previous decision by Belfast City Council to look outside the city has contributed to major environmental threat in the Mallusk area and potential significant damage to the human environment as well as the natural environment and that the Hydepark site does not appear to me to be the best practical environmental option.”
“We can, however, be absolutely assured that that sort of industrial site, on transport links, not against open countryside, and where there is the best possible use of the heat generated as well as the best possible opportunities for easy communications without causing disturbance on small rural roads or in the growing suburbs around the Mallusk area, are all key reasons that point to the need to look to somewhere different.”
“That would then also allow, as I have said, the waste heat to be used by industrial processes in that area and would ensure that we would get the best possible benefit, because we also need to be aware of the needs for Bombardier to have its own generated cheap electricity, as Bombardier Belfast competes with other Bombardier plants elsewhere in the world with much lower energy costs. <BR /> <BR />So, there is potential there, but we cannot be sure that that is exactly the solution for Bombardier.”
“<BR /> <BR />We cannot be sure, even with the potential expansion, that Bombardier would be able to handle the kinds of waste arising from the domestic sector as well as those from commercial and industrial use, but what is clear is that a site somewhere in that area, whether on the north foreshore or on the Shorts side of the river, is the best possible site for something like this. That would put it adjacent to the key transport links, including the M1, M2, Westlink and the Sydenham Bypass and even, frankly, would allow the option that waste could be compacted in the Antrim/Ballymena area, the Larne/Carrick area, in north Down and in Lisburn and moved by rail into that site. That would be a considerable benefit to those who currently see the congestion that exists on those key arterial roads.”
“<BR /> <BR />In that respect, we are certainly all aware of the plans for Bombardier's site, but I am not sure exactly where Bombardier currently stands. There appear to be differing views on exactly what it may be capable of dealing with in the way of household waste. My understanding is that the formal planning permission at this stage relates solely to commercial and industrial waste, and, therefore, that being the option is not quite as clear-cut as perhaps some of us from south Antrim might wish it to be.”
“<BR /> <BR />Ideally, of course, an energy-from-waste plant such as this should have been sited, as was originally proposed by Arc21, on the north foreshore in an industrial area. Unfortunately, that was blocked some years ago by Belfast City Council, despite the fact that, according to my memory, polling across Belfast, particularly in the Shore Road area, showed that people were broadly supportive. A majority of councillors voted against that. Yet, if we are to look to the best practical environmental option, clearly, siting a process such as this in an industrial area close to transport and communication links and where there are businesses to make use of the heat that is generated as well the electricity is a key option.”
“We are long past the time when individual councils, even at the scale of the new 11 councils, will be capable of managing their own waste in a meaningful way. <BR /> <BR />The key issue for me is the local infrastructure for the site that is proposed. The idea of siting an energy-from-waste plant in, effectively, a brownfield site in an old quarry has certain benefits. However, we then have to look to the issue of the surrounding infrastructure, and Mrs Cameron has well highlighted the problems of the housing development in the Mallusk area, the poor roads infrastructure and the fact that even what might have been possible for a roads layout had this been thought of before Mayfield, Alderley and that general area were developed, is simply not now a practical option for the number of lorries that would have to deliver to that site.”
“Frankly, the key issues of concern in the past on dioxins should be addressed by ensuring that we remove plastics from the waste stream for reuse and recycling before they end up at an energy-for-waste plant. <BR /> <BR />In one respect, I must disagree with Danny Kinahan. He quoted E F Schumacher when he said that small is beautiful, and I agree with that as a principle in many areas. Certainly, something like composting should happen as close as possible to where it is derived and be used as close as possible to where it is processed. However, the reality of the economics of energy from waste is that we need to look to plants that are of a significant size. It is not necessarily certain that we will go with the size that is in the plan for Hydepark, but we will be looking at substantial projects.”
“It is an issue, therefore, that we have to address, and it needs to be considered urgently as we look at the targets that we in Northern Ireland have to meet, whether they are European or are linked to UK-wide taxation. We can no longer continue to landfill the amount that we currently do. <BR /> <BR />Good work has been done by Arc21, as a consortium of councils looking at the options for the largest of the three groups set up in Northern Ireland. Unlike some Members, I have no problems with the concept of the technology: the kind of health concerns that existed about incineration are no longer relevant if we use the proper modern process.”
“For the sake of Hansard, I record that I am speaking from a Back Bench as a constituency MLA. <BR /> <BR />I congratulate my constituency colleague Pam Cameron on securing this Adjournment debate. However, it is not just a constituency issue; it is a strategic issue for the whole of Northern Ireland as we look to the future, although, clearly, in the concept of the current plans for the Hydepark site, it is very much a constituency issue for those who live in the Mallusk area. <BR /> <BR />I fundamentally support the concept of generating energy from waste. There is a limit to what can be recycled. To put it more accurately: whatever we do to reduce, reuse and recycle, there will still be some residual waste that can only be dealt with in a practicable way by deriving energy from it.”
“Again, whilst not formally approved by the Executive, I suspect that they will be acceptable to the House. <BR /> <BR />I note the move to a three-year strategy rather than an annual review, which will allow the strategy to provide a longer-term focus whilst retaining flexibility to quickly incorporate learning identified at the point of delivery. Again, this seems to be the sensible approach. <BR /> <BR />With the exception of amendment No 10 to clause 15, I commend the amendments to the House.”
“Again, whilst I understand that the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety is, in principle, supportive of these amendments, the Executive have not had the opportunity to agree the changes they would incorporate. I understand, however, that DHSSPS officials have worked with the Office of the Legislative Counsel and Lord Morrow to ensure that the intentions of the previous clauses 19 and 20 are deliverable in practice. <BR /> <BR />The proposed amendments combine the provisions in those two previous clauses into one clause 19, so that clause 20 is no longer required. This seems to be a sensible approach. I am sure that Members will be reassured to note that the key elements of clause 20 — the requirement to develop a strategy, and the requirement to involve other Northern Ireland Departments — have been retained.”
“I have, therefore, agreed to amendment Nos 5 to 9, 11 and 12 but continue to caution against the amendment to the definition of sexual services. <BR /> <BR />I now turn briefly to amendment Nos 13 and 14, which amend clauses 19 and 20 respectively and have been tabled by Lord Morrow.”
“<BR /> <BR />I want to make it absolutely clear that the amendments to clause 15 that have been jointly tabled do not represent in their entirety the changes that the Department would like to have seen made to the provisions, most of which were rejected by the Bill sponsor. However, given that the Department was involved in the process of reaching a compromise on some of these issues, I have added my name to those amendments. They represent only the extent of the outcome of negotiations. Research has shown that this new offence is unlikely to succeed in reducing the demand for paid sex and, therefore, may have limited effect in changing the market for trafficking for sexual exploitation. However, the Assembly has made clear its desire to take this path.”
“The Department's view is that the duty to report on the operation of the new offence did not provide sufficient scope to include a duty to report on convictions for trafficking offences under sections 2 and 4 of the Act and on the extent to which the new offence has operated to reduce human trafficking. The new offence, unlike the existing one, has no connection with trafficking, and convictions will not be related to trafficking. However, I failed to persuade Lord Morrow of the sense of a statutory separation of the duty to report, although, in effect, this would have continued to result in identical reporting arrangements to the Assembly. Amendment No 12, therefore, represents a compromise for a single duty to report to be contained in the Act rather than, as previously drafted, in the Sexual Offences Order.”
“From a departmental point of view, it seems unlikely that the offence as drafted will allow for a sufficient range of factors to demarcate a summary trial from an indictable option. Again, this position was not accepted by the Bill sponsor. The option to try in the Crown Court remains. Amendment Nos 7 and 8, therefore, simply correct errors in the penalties that are available for both summary and indictable convictions. <BR /> <BR />Finally, I asked for some change to be made to the duty to report to the Assembly on a number of aspects of the Bill, both on human trafficking and on the operation of the new article 64A.”
“I genuinely believe that, by dealing with this aspect of seeking to produce a statutory definition in a way that is almost trying to tackle prostitution without actually using the word "prostitution" in the context of a Bill dealing with trafficking rather than taking a comprehensive look at sexual offences in general, we in the House are running into difficulties in a way that makes it likely that this law will become extremely difficult for the police and the Public Prosecution Service. We may have to re-examine it in a few years' time as we report on its operation, as we or, at least, others in this place after us will be obliged to do. <BR /> <BR />I also retain doubts about the proposals for the offence being available for trial in the Crown Court.”
“The issue is not what the Alliance Party wants the policy intent to be; the issue is ensuring that we do not have a statutory definition that creates more problems and has come about because of the attempt to remove the word "prostitution" from it. I believe that we have plenty of examples of where it is possible for the courts to interpret. Courts interpret appropriate policy intent day and daily without having matters spelt out. Any statutory definition is unlikely ever to be exhaustive without the context being set. It could inhibit the ability of the judiciary to interpret the wording of the offence in a flexible and sensible way. I retain those concerns. <BR /> <BR />I was not able to persuade Lord Morrow of my position, and he did not persuade me of his. Therefore, his amendment is tabled without agreement.”
“That is very different from where we are. It is not actually the case that Dublin is following Belfast; Dublin is thinking carefully and clearly in a way that I honestly believe this House has failed to do. When I was considering those points, I asked Lord Morrow to consider either reinstating the prostitution element or amending the offence to remove the attempt to define sexual services. The offence would then rely solely on the Public Prosecution Service and the courts as arbiters of the Assembly's policy intent, rather than on statute. Any statutory definition —”
“I am sorry, but I cannot clarify that, for the reason that I gave about the normal protocol. <BR /> <BR />My view had been that removing the context of prostitution from this offence and relying instead on a statutory definition of sexual services cannot precisely draw the parameters that we need for the law to be clear and easily understood. Lord Morrow quoted the Bill that was published in Dublin last week. I notice that the proposal in that Bill confines the offence to:”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I think that my response to Mr Maginness will have to be that there is a convention that Ministers do not reveal the advice they have received. I was merely quoting a conversation with the Attorney General, since practically every other Member seems capable of quoting it. Where my other sources of advice are concerned, I shall maintain the usual ministerial protocol.”
“There may not be many strip clubs operating in Northern Ireland, but, if we run the risk of criminalising activity way beyond the original intent, that raises some difficulties. My view is that by removing the context of prostitution from the offence and relying instead on seeking a statutory definition of sexual services —”
“I congratulate Mr McCartney on somehow reading from his position the next line of my hand-scribbled notes. Members have quoted the Attorney General's view. The Attorney General believed and, indeed, said in my presence that he did not believe that those activities would be covered, Certainly the advice that I have is, bluntly speaking, that, if people engage in lap dancing or stripping, they are touching themselves in a sexual way for the gratification of those who are observing it. I find it difficult to suggest that that is not covered by amendment No 10. Therefore, I believe that we are going way beyond the normal understanding that we had when this was originally introduced when we were talking about prostitution.”
“It seems to me that that is a very wide-ranging definition.”
“For example, it would include watching lap dancers, strip artists and live sex shows, providing that whatever is purchased is bought for sexual gratification, which, one imagines, is largely the case. Frankly, one imagines that it is largely the purpose. It could also, as Mr Dickson said, include the purchase of so-called strippergrams and kissograms, whether there is touching or not. Is that beyond what the Assembly intended when it passed the clause at Consideration Stage? I ask that question, because it seems to me that we are now going way beyond the Assembly's intent at that stage. Indeed, Mr McCartney raised how it would relate to lap dancing. <BR /> <BR />Let us remind ourselves of the words. Proposed article 64A(4) reads:”
“The offence, as it stands after Consideration Stage, does not appear to cover circumstances in which, for example, a person paid for an individual to perform an intimate sex act in his presence but no touching took place involving the purchaser, even in cases in which the person was subjected to force. <BR /> <BR />Lord Morrow fairly outlined in his opening speech the view that I have taken on the basis of the advice that I received in this area. Amendment No 10 seeks to address the gap and should allow for prosecution in the circumstances described by the PPS. However, I firmly believe that, although addressing that flaw, the amendment simply adds a different problem by opening up the offence still further to those who purchase sexual services involving activities beyond the private sphere.”
“<BR /> <BR />There are other fundamental issues that, despite all the agreement that we have reached in so many areas, I still have concerns about, particularly the continuing desire to include a statutory definition of "sexual services". Amendment No 10 adds a further angle to that. The origin of the existing definition was, as I understand it, an attempt to confine criminalisation to the purchase of sex from a prostitute rather than other less direct activities not involving physical presence or contact. Unfortunately, that definition was flawed, as it seemed to exclude from prosecution some circumstances in which potentially an offence should be available. Those circumstances were pointed out by the Public Prosecution Service (PPS).”
“<BR /> <BR />I am also grateful that Lord Morrow accepted the Department's view put forward in amendment No 12 that it was more appropriate to impose a duty on the Department to raise public awareness of the change in the law rather than, particularly in these days of budgetary restraint, running an advertising campaign. The Department will make endeavours to ensure that the public know of the new law, although I suspect that debates in the House have done that very well up to now. In particular, we will highlight to those by whom the impact will be felt most heavily — the sex workers — the changes and when they will occur. We have been made aware that there is much concern among that group of individuals about the introduction of the law and the effects that it will have on their well-being and safety.”
“I am grateful, for example, that Lord Morrow agreed to the Department's wish in amendment No 11 to see conspiracy and procurement added to the list of offences that the person selling sexual services can no longer be found to have committed. That is a key, useful statement for the clarity with which we sought to decriminalise those involved in prostitution, and that was clearly the wish of Lord Morrow from the beginning. I hope that Tom Elliott will bear in mind that point as we look at the implications of amendment No 11.”
“I note that a number of Members praised the work of my staff in dealing with the Bill. I certainly thank them. It is an illustration of the positive way in which we have approached the vast majority of issues that came up as we have discussed the various stages of the Bill. <BR /> <BR />The Assembly has made clear its desire to see the criminalisation of the purchase of sexual services. Although I am personally not convinced by that approach, I nevertheless engaged with Lord Morrow on amending clause 15 to ensure that the Assembly's intent matches the provision in the Bill. The majority of the amendments tabled to the clause for today fall within that category. Lord Morrow has given detailed explanations of the reasons for them all. As he highlighted, we have agreed on most of the issues, but not all.”
“We may be the smallest of the three justice jurisdictions in the United Kingdom, but it proves that we can be effective when we speak together and can sometimes even persuade Whitehall to listen. I am grateful for the help that Lord Morrow gave in ensuring that, on this occasion, Whitehall listened. <BR /> <BR />On that basis, I believe that all the amendments in this group should receive the Assembly's full support. They carry through on our commitment to fight slavery and trafficking, and I trust that, when we come to vote on them later, they will have our full support.”
“So, I am grateful to them, as well as to those officials in my Department who have been working on it. <BR /> <BR />Lord Morrow also explained the key issues on the statutory defence and agreed with me, particularly on the relevant offences that relate to the victims of trafficking and the particular need to consider how they may go. He then spelt out the particular benefits that I and he believe we will now get from having the UK-wide commissioner. I believe that we now have a better role for that commissioner, because neither Lord Morrow nor I gave up when the Home Secretary produced some early proposals that would not have been particularly helpful to this jurisdiction. I believe that it is an example of constructive engagement.”
“I congratulate Mr Elliott for picking up the next point, because, as Lord Morrow highlighted, after that, there is the potential for the guardian to appear in court to represent the child. I shall not repeat the subsection because I would probably get it wrong, but Lord Morrow spelt it out in detail in his contribution. He also dealt in detail with the role of the Health and Social Care Board, and I trust that that will satisfy the House that we will ensure that the provisions of the legislation properly cater for separated children. <BR /> <BR />Lord Morrow also added to the list of those whom we must thank, including the Children's Commissioner and our former colleague in this place, Patricia Lewsley-Mooney, as well as, indeed, the DHSSPS officials, who have certainly helped me while I have been considering this group of amendments.”
“But, clearly, the issues are for the robust arrangements that the Department of Health and the Health and Social Care Board are setting in place.”
“It is possible that such guardians, like any public official, could find themselves before the courts for how they carried out their duties, but, in my memory, I cannot remember cases of social workers or health visitors being brought before the courts for the way in which they did their job, and I see no reason to assume that the guardian will be expected to be before the court.”
“Members are not particularly reticent about tabling motions for debate on matters that they consider important, whether or not there is a formal report laid before the House. Mr Maginness originally saw a benefit in having a local rapporteur but could now see the benefit in tying into the UK-wide commissioner. Mr Elliott, Lord Morrow and Mr Dickson made similar points. There is clearly broad consensus about moving to link into the UK-wide system and getting the benefits from it. <BR /> <BR />Mr Elliott asked about the specific role of the guardian and, in particular, how it might relate to the courts. The guardian is specified as being an employee of an appropriate charity appointed by and under the arrangements made by the Health and Social Care Board and responsible through its normal accountability arrangements.”
“Although Mr McCartney talked about wanting to be able to have debates here about the reports that will be produced and said therefore that he did not support amendment No 44, it is the case that we have the power in this place to request specific reports from the commissioner. Those reports would be laid before the Assembly, providing a perfect opportunity for any of them to be debated should Members wish to hold a debate on them. <BR /> <BR />There is also a specific power under clause 15 — if amended later, as, I suspect, it is likely to be, — that there will be reporting on the impact on human trafficking and prostitution offences from the effect of the Bill. Therefore, once there is an Act in place, we will have the full opportunities to debate reports.”
“These are important amendments that will help future-proof the Bill, facilitate our understanding of the nature and scale of these heinous practices and, ultimately, offer greater protection for victims, especially child victims. In almost all respects, I am grateful for the support from Members who have spoken. I will deal briefly with the comments that were made around the Chamber. <BR /> <BR />Mr Givan, both personally and as Committee Chair, outlined why he and the Committee were supportive of amendment No 44. I will touch later on the references that Lord Morrow made.”
“I appreciate the Member's giving way. Just on a technical point, we would be expected to make a small contribution towards the UK-wide role, but it would be significantly less cost than a separate Northern Ireland office.”
“<BR /> <BR />Lord Morrow quite rightly emphasised in earlier debates that he wanted to see the Home Secretary's plan before withdrawing the proposal for a local rapporteur. I am grateful that he has now agreed that the independent anti-slavery commissioner's role is an alternative to the Northern Ireland rapporteur that provides all the cover that we need in this jurisdiction. I trust that Members will support this amendment to remove clause 26 from the Bill. <BR /> <BR />I commend these amendments to the House.”
“I am grateful that she changed her initial proposals as a result of the lobbying in support of the proposals that Lord Morrow and I had. <BR /> <BR />I welcome Mr Hyland's early appointment, which will allow the important work to commence. I have spoken to him on a number of occasions, and he has agreed to participate in a cross-border conference on forced labour that my Department will co-host with the Department of Justice and Equality next month. I hope that Members will be reassured, therefore, that Mr Hyland is already demonstrating his commitment towards Northern Ireland as one of his priorities. My Department and I look forward to working closely with him over the coming months.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is my firm view that a commissioner operating across the entire UK provides a better oversight model than the local rapporteur under clause 26. I do not need to labour my reasons for that, as Members will be aware of them. They touch on accountability, greater oversight, wider opportunities to identify best practice and learn from other jurisdictions, and greater economies of scale. <BR /> <BR />Members may be aware that Kevin Hyland, a former head of the Metropolitan Police service's human trafficking unit, has now been appointed as the commissioner designate. My Department participated in the appointment process, and I lobbied the Home Secretary to ensure that the commissioner could operate in a very robust way that is helpful to Northern Ireland.”