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 47 of 50.
“Yes, but the point that I am trying to make about joining up is that the NIEA had the duty to identify it, because that is its specific role, but the financial expertise was best available from SOCA, which was then absorbed into the NCA, and that expertise could not continue from within the NCA. We will call that a score draw between Mrs Kelly and Mr Poots. <BR /> <BR />One other issue that I highlighted last week was the NCA requiring PSNI assistance to search the homes of suspected drug dealers. Other serious incidents under way meant that the PSNI could not respond as quickly as it had hoped in circumstances that may have led to evidence being removed. If the NCA had operational officers here, that work would have been carried out by them.”
“I want to see all the relevant agencies joining together in the way that the NIEA was able to send people to the next meeting of the Organised Crime Task Force to discuss some of those issues. Unfortunately, that assistance could not continue. I give way.”
“That is where the UK-wide expertise is, yet those officers cannot be operational on the ground in Northern Ireland. We had an issue of money laundering using pre-payment cards where there was serious need for a complex financial investigation, which, again, is part of the NCA's expertise, but it could not be provided. <BR /> <BR />Mr Attwood highlighted the issue of the largest waste dump found, I think, anywhere on these islands, on the banks of the Faughan. The NCA was unable to continue the assistance that SOCA gave in the early stages with financial investigations, because it was a devolved issue and the NCA could not continue to provide that support.”
“That, at a time of increasing pressures, is utterly ridiculous. <BR /> <BR />Many Members will have seen the paper that the Chief Constable circulated after he received it from the director general of the National Crime Agency. The paper looked at some of the issues for which we have simply not got the resources that we need to deal with organised crime. I highlighted that at Question Time last week, but let me refer to just a few of those points. Operation Notarise, the UK-wide operation against online child abuse, could not get direct support from NCA officers in Northern Ireland. The PSNI had to carry out the duties that were performed by NCA officers elsewhere, on the basis that the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre has been absorbed into the NCA.”
“What is even more ironic is that Gerry Kelly, who is, of course, not present in the House, managed to highlight that as one of the specific issues. If I were Gerry Kelly, I would not have scored an own goal like that. <BR /> <BR />On a resource level, there is absolutely no doubt that, at a time of increasing pressures, the PSNI must be able to tap into the resources that the NCA can provide to undertake or assist in operations. If the PSNI cannot access those resources, we will see officers being redeployed from the crimes that they should be dealing with in the purely devolved, local criminal sphere to deal with the organised issues. NCA officers are currently sitting in Belfast doing back-office work for police services in England, Wales and Scotland because they are not allowed to be operational here.”
“I believe that the PSNI does an excellent job, but there is no doubt that, once criminals start operating across jurisdictions and international boundaries, as many crime groups do, it needs the support of the NCA, just as the Irish authorities — we had a list from Mr Lynch of all the Irish authorities involved — benefited from that support from the NCA recently when they seized the yacht carrying a significant amount of cocaine. The amount seems to inflate as the debate goes on. I am not sure that it has reached £100 million yet, but it was a significant and serious issue. There is a certain irony that an Garda Síochána can benefit from the full cooperation of the NCA to deal with arresting the occupants of a yacht off the waters of County Cork while some Members of the House will stop the PSNI getting the full benefit.”
“We have had descriptions from different parts of the House of the impacts of organised crime, whether it be drug dealing, fuel laundering, waste dumping or the increasing problem of cybercrime, on which there is a very limited pool of expertise to tackle it at the highest level. We all know, because we discuss it frequently in the House, the damage that human trafficking does: it destroys lives. Northern Ireland is both a transit country and a destination for many traffickers.”
“There is a significant gap in our law enforcement ability, as anyone who read the Chief Constable's recent comments in the 'Belfast Telegraph' would have seen. It concerns me, as Justice Minister, that we do not have access to the skills and expertise that are available from the NCA and are not easily available to the PSNI. These are not issues of minor crime; they are issues of serious and organised crime both in Northern Ireland and with a reach across these islands and the world. <BR /> <BR />Recent PSNI figures estimate that 140 to 160 organised crime groups are active in Northern Ireland and there are 800 active criminals.”
“I welcome the fact that we have the motion before the House today, as I am glad of the opportunity to share with Members the difficulties being faced by law enforcement agencies because of the ongoing situation with the non-operability in the devolved sphere of the National Crime Agency. <BR /> <BR />As has already been highlighted — Mr Givan referred to the first birthday being tomorrow — the NCA came into operation on 7 October last year, and we have still to reach agreement on its powers extending fully here with appropriate accountability mechanisms. <BR /> <BR />I have been having talks in recent weeks with most of the Executive parties on the proposal paper that I put forward.”
“Let us not have him highlight one particular point I made as if I am seeking to protect an individual rather than trying to ensure that, in the difficult financial circumstances that we are in at present, we get a handle on the cost of legal aid.”
“I am not sure whether Mr Elliott wants me to repeat my entire speech. I merely gave one specific example, but I made a number of references as to why the dangers of confining the appointment of the director of the legal aid casework in the way he has suggested could create difficulties in short-term changes as well as in transformation. As a member of the Committee, he is surely well aware of the problems that we have in managing legal aid at the moment and the vital need to get a handle on that. <BR /> <BR />I also gave significant examples of the current open practice that exists across the Senior Civil Service and, indeed, the open list, which includes both internal and external applicants who would be available, for example, if we were seeking to draw from it at the present time.”
“So, if Mr Elliott did not hear me objecting to both his amendments, I fear that he was not listening terribly well to what I said.”
“I am grateful to the Member for giving way, but, if he did not hear what I said, I am really concerned. I made a very specific point that his amendment would prevent the current chief executive of the LSC becoming the director of legal aid casework as we seek to make these changes. If that is not a pretty fundamental objection to his first amendment, I am not sure what it is. <BR /> <BR />I also made a point about the confusion around his second amendment. I said that it applied only to one subsection of one clause in a way that did nothing to deal with the concerns about the powers of direction, which are well covered by the limitations on any individual case and the limitations that I highlighted with the Assembly's role via affirmative resolution on classes of case.”
“<BR /> <BR />The suggestion that I am engaged in a power grab is an utter nonsense, when the reality is that the power is being taken as far away as possible from political influence and being given as much as possible to the director of legal aid casework. That is being done under the guidance and duties that exist to ensure that only the Assembly can change classes of case and only the individual director can decide individual cases. <BR /> <BR />On that basis, I do not believe that the amendment contributes anything. It merely clouds the issue by referring to one or two points. If that amendment is moved, I trust that the House will reject it also.”
“There was a reference to a power grab, but the reality is that, as I highlighted a fortnight ago, I have already given away, as a matter of administrative practice, any power that I had to determine continuing funding in inquest cases. Representation for next of kin in inquest cases currently has to be approved by the Minister, but I have given away the responsibility for continuing assessments of further applications to the chief executive of the LSC because I do not believe that it is appropriate for the Minister to carry out those functions. We will move this forward in a way that ensures that those powers formally pass in statute.”
“I do not accept that it makes it clearer, because it only applies in one small part. It is only inserted into one subsection of one clause where there are references to directions. The point is that the overarching issues that appear in the 2003 Order and the references to the schedule 2 powers are clearly covered quite explicitly there. There is no need to tinker around the edges and make a reference to one piece of legislation only. It is not assisting with or adding anything, and the powers and the limitations of powers on the Minister are absolutely explicit elsewhere in statute in a much more coherent and joined-up way than appears by tinkering with just one subsection of one clause of this Bill.”
“That may be the point of concern, but article 46(5) of the Order, as I highlighted previously, provides that any regulations made under article 12(6) are subject to Assembly control by draft affirmative procedure. Mr Givan made that point today. So, it would simply not be possible for the Department to give the kind of direction or guidance reflecting the scope of cases, never mind the individual cases, that may be funded without the approval of the Assembly. I trust that that reassures Members who have expressed concern about that. <BR /> <BR />The term "power grab", as I highlighted to Mr McCartney, who is about to intervene again —”
“That means that the assurances in clause 3(2)(a) of the Bill that the Department must not give direction or guidance about an individual are simply not affected by the 1999 Order. <BR /> <BR />There may also be confusion about whether anything in the Bill, the 1999 Order or other statute allows me or the Department to give directions in relation to classes of cases, as has just been highlighted by Mr Maginness on the issue of judicial review. I must say that, from discussions that have happened around the Executive table, I think that I am probably more favourable to judicial reviews being allowed than a number of other Ministers are. Article 12(5) of the 2003 Order prescribes, in schedule 2, the services that the director of legal aid casework may not fund as civil legal services. Article 12(6) provides:”
“The decisions will be taken by the director on the merits of the case and not influenced by political considerations. As well as being published, any direction or guidance issued by me or my Department cannot override the provisions of the relevant legislation, whether primary or secondary. <BR /> <BR />There may have been some confusion over the reference to the Departments (Northern Ireland) Order 1999 during Consideration Stage. That refers to the power of Ministers to direct. The 1999 Order states that all functions of a Department shall be exercised subject to the direction and control of the Minister, but it does not mean that I or any other Minister can use the 1999 Order to give directions to the director on individual cases. Article 4(6) of that Order prevents that by making it clear that:”
“<BR /> <BR />If the amendment does have any effect, it is to interfere with the set of safeguards on the power of giving directions, which are designed to work together to provide the appropriate level of assurance that the House has been seeking. Those safeguards have been extensively aired by the Committee, as the Chair said, and during Consideration Stage, and, frankly, I do not think I need to repeat them all today. We have a carefully constructed set of arrangements, and amendments could potentially result in meddling and lead to unintended consequences. <BR /> <BR />The key point is that, under the Bill as it was originally drafted and as it proceeded through Committee Stage, all applications for civil legal services will be dealt with individually.”
“I think that Mr Allister has just made the point that I was making. We have a list at the moment of those eligible for grade 5 appointments, some of whom are internal and some of whom are external. That is where the openness has come through. So, he makes the point that I was making about the existence of that list. <BR /> <BR />I will turn to amendment No 2. I am simply not sure whether it achieves any effect. It merely restates the requirement to comply with directions that appear elsewhere in legislation. It is not clear to me why only the power of direction in clause 3(1)(a) is singled out and not the other references to directions. I am not sure whether, in that way, it makes sense as drafted.”
“As I understand the principles of reserve lists, they would only apply for up to a year. So, if the post were to fall vacant at 53 weeks, you would potentially be going through a very long process to make an open appointment with a complete gap at that stage. I am not sure that we would be able to maintain a reserve list for any longer than the one year. Indeed, in those circumstances, if there were effectively a list of those who were already on the grade 5 approved list, that would be the appropriate point to go to, not to go to public competition to get a speedy filling of the vacancy.”
“Whilst I think that I have outlined, a fortnight ago and today, my willingness to look at the opening up of competition for posts in the Senior Civil Service, there are difficulties in specifying in a Bill that, right from the introduction of the post, it would have to be somebody external and that an internal candidate could not apply whatever the circumstances. I hope that, on the basis of what Members said when we discussed it at Consideration Stage and what has been said today, Mr Elliott will think of those points and accept that there is a broad understanding around the Chamber of his intent and a willingness to work on that but will not move the amendment, because I believe that it is unhelpful. If he does move it, I ask the House to reject it. <BR /> <BR />On amendment No 2 —”
“It is unnecessary because we have the openness already coming through. It would create difficulties if we had particular needs to make appointments speedily, and it would have particular difficulties on the transition. If it is made even internally, the reality is that, the way things are changing, there would almost certainly be somebody bringing experience from outside the Civil Service as they fill the post. <BR /> <BR />So, I do believe that there are significant problems with the wording of the amendment.”
“It is certainly my understanding that a temporary appointment, given the specific powers vested in the director of legal aid casework, would fall under the provisions of this amendment. This is not somebody temporarily acting up from one post to another; there are very specific legal duties, including, as we will be talking about later, the duty of individual decision-making, that are attached to this post. I find it difficult to see that even a temporary appointment would not fall foul, because it would be the formal designation of a post holder who would have to carry out those duties. <BR /> <BR />We are not talking about a simple acting-up mechanism for people operating within a mainstream policy area. That is another point where we would have difficulty if we were to fix open competition into the Bill.”
“We could tie it down if we passed this amendment, but doing so would potentially rob us of the benefits of having continuity at this particularly difficult time of transition, because my understanding is that it would remove the ability to nominate the current chief executive of the Legal Services Commission (LSC) as the director of legal aid casework. That is a point that was raised by a number of Members at Consideration Stage. Mr Givan referred to it today, and, I think, Mr Maginness referred to it last time.”
“As I was saying, the key point is that there would be a complete lack of flexibility in any circumstances. Suppose that we had a number of changes of director over a short time, for whatever reason. We would potentially have to run a costly and, worse, time-consuming open competition. We would hope that that would not be the case, but you cannot be sure that health issues, job opportunities or changes in personal circumstances would not lead to that happening. Given the difficulties that we have had in managing legal aid, the last thing that we would need is a lengthy series of vacancies for the post of director. <BR /> <BR />The danger is that the approach that is put forward in the amendment would remove any flexibility.”
“The real danger of putting it in the Bill is that it would remove any options that might be appropriate in other circumstances. One key example —”
“In fact, the most recent competition, which produced the current list of those eligible for appointment at grade 5 in the Senior Civil Service — the grading that the post of director has — has produced a list of those suitable for appointment from internal and external candidates. So, there is clearly already an open list of those who have proved their merit, and that includes people from outside the Civil Service. That is the reality, and that process is ongoing. Recently, we heard about it in the context of a permanent secretary position and other senior posts. The Civil Service is being opened up. I do not think that we need to fix that open competition in the Bill for one particular post, when that is the principle of what is already happening.”
“There are real problems in putting that level of explicit provision in a Bill as an appropriate way of delivering on the objective of opening up the Senior Civil Service to wider competition. <BR /> <BR />I made it clear at Consideration Stage a fortnight ago that the Bill as drafted allows for that open competition if that is the best way in which to fill the post of director at any time. If it is the right approach, it can happen. In fact, I made the case that that is what happened when the chief executive of the Youth Justice Agency was appointed. There was a specific open competition for that post. I assure Members that if that is the case, that will apply again.”
“Mr Elliott said that, at Consideration Stage, everyone but the Alliance Party — I think that that was his precise quote — appeared to be sympathetic to the principle of opening up the Civil Service. Let me be absolutely clear: I expressed my commitment, and I believe that Stewart Dickson made a similar commitment, to the general aims in the amendments that Mr Elliott had at Consideration Stage. The difficulty that we had was with whether the amendments, as proposed then, and, indeed, as proposed today, would succeed in achieving the aim that he set out. It seems to me that the amendment that talks about putting in place an open competition after a civil servant has been designated as director does not make sense.”
“I am grateful to the Member for giving way. The term "power grab" has been used and will doubtless hit the headlines tomorrow. Does the Member agree, given what he has just said, that this is the reverse of a power grab? This gives away power that the Minister currently has.”
“I talked earlier about what my responsibilities were, but to be asked to explain the actions of a private sector company is beyond even the wildest dreams that I would have of what my remit might be.”
“Our penalties in Northern Ireland are basically comparable to the penalties that exist in the other two jurisdictions across the UK. I am not sure whether it is the legislative penalty that is the issue so much as what some Members might feel about the penalties that are actually imposed by judges in individual cases. Of course, that is something that I referred to earlier when talking about potentially looking at the issue of referability.”
“All those are issues that, frankly, cannot be left to the police. We need the support of the public, and we need a joined-up partnership.”
“I could agree with all the points that we might make in the Chamber about more resources, but the reality is that, because of the current behaviour in the Executive and the general budget pressures, there will be no more resources. <BR /> <BR />There is no doubt that a drug problem is arising across western Europe, if not further afield, that effects Northern Ireland as well. That is why we are attempting to enlist the support of the wider community. For example, a number of social landlords were involved in the launch of the scratch-and-sniff card that alerts people to the smell of cannabis as well as giving them information about the signs of cannabis growing. The industrial-scale growing of cannabis is a significant issue and, on average, there are two discoveries a week of such processes.”
“Again, Mr McQuillan tempts me to go too far into an operational area, but I understand that the Chief Constable's expectation is that he would have to prioritise the needs of today in a way that would result in some officers being removed from some of the historical work that is being done. There are specific areas, whether it be the HET, other historical work or issues arising from the Saville inquiry, that will potentially see a reduction of staffing because of the need to put officers onto front line duties today.”
“However, at a level of something like 6%, it is almost certain that police recruitment would stop this year, a significant number of civilian staff on short-term contracts would be replaced by police officers and the good work that was done by Matt Baggott — taking police officers from behind desks and putting them onto the streets — might well have to be reversed in a way that would be detrimental to public safety.”
“Technically, I do not ask the Chief Constable to make any efficiencies. That is an issue for the Chief Constable to consider in conjunction with the Policing Board on the basis of the budget allocation that is being made. As I said earlier, it is difficult to be clear. I told Mr Lunn that we were looking at efficiencies probably in the region of 6%, but it is not yet clear what the position is. We badly need to know more certainly.”
“I repeat: there may be issues of public confidence, but, as Minister, I cannot interfere in a process that is not mine, whether at the coroner's level or the policing level.”
“The reality is that this is an issue that is of direct relevance operationally to the police in how they carry that through and to inquests that are in process. In neither circumstance would it be appropriate for me to comment on it.”
“The position in a public statement from the previous Minister, when I had written to him suggesting that we do a joint consultation on all aspects of abortion, was that he believed it would be confusing to put the health aspects in the same consultation paper as the justice aspects. On that basis, it is his responsibility to consider the health aspects and, as I have said to the House, I have a paper that I trust will be out for public consultation before the end of October, which will put forward proposals on the justice aspects.”
“Indeed, just a couple of weeks ago, I had a further communication from a young woman who found herself in exactly the position that Mr Beggs describes. I do believe that the House will have to face up to the difficult issue of how we resolve the concerns of such women, many of whom would not previously have described themselves as pro-choice, but who, faced with the fact that they are carrying a foetus that is not viable, have to consider the dreadful question of how that affects them and the lives of their families and how they will respond in the future. I hope that we will get the opportunity to hear the voices of those women within a fairly short period.”
“Mr Beggs raises a very serious issue. I believe that a number of different aspects of abortion legislation need to be considered. One which has been raised is the specific issue of the premises in which lawful abortions may be performed. That is a matter purely for the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety in its regulation aspect, although it may request assistance from the Department of Justice. The others relate to termination either on grounds of fatal foetal abnormality or sexual crime. <BR /> <BR />I have a document that is close to publication, which I hope to share with the Committee for Justice very shortly. It will then be published for consultation to deal with those two aspects, which are the responsibilities of the Department of Justice.”
“I cannot agree that anything should be exempt from cuts. We have made good efforts to protect those mechanisms and the front line for the past four years, but the failure of other Executive Ministers now means that those cuts are inevitable.”
“I believe that every part of the justice system is equally vital. The reality is that the cuts are being apportioned as fairly as they can be, taking account of the range of pressures that exist. To suggest that we should somehow keep the ombudsman's office or the Historical Enquiries Team going at full pelt whilst not protecting the public today would be, I believe, a dereliction of my duty, which is to police the present, to provide a justice system for the present and to provide probation and prison officers for the present. It is the reality that until all parties agree on dealing with the past, we cannot allow the justice budget to be completely hidebound by the problems of the past to the expense of the present and the future.”
“If we cannot get the matter resolved very quickly, there will be real impacts on front line public services, on community safety and on the issues of concern to our community. Indeed, it is now almost inevitable that there will be those significant impacts however quickly decisions are taken. So, I agree entirely about the necessity of addressing this. Indeed, I proposed last week that the Executive should clear diaries and concentrate on the issues.”
“I could not agree more with my colleague about the necessity of the Executive as a whole to address those issues. Those who read the 'Belfast Telegraph' on Friday will have seen a graphic that illustrated information given from a very senior level in the Civil Service, and it showed that every day's delay is costing the Northern Ireland Executive £1 million. As the Minister responsible for the third-largest spending Department, I see a large part of that impacting on the Department of Justice. Given the significant cuts that have been made in the current CSR period, because of the link to the Home Office and the Ministry of Justice, it is absolutely clear that we are now at the point at which this can no longer be done by cutting the back office.”
“We have already seen the Probation Board lay off temporary probation officers, thereby increasing concerns about the supervision of offenders in the community. It is highly likely that we will see some prisoners locked up for longer, despite the Prison Service's good work on rehabilitation, about which I was just talking to Mr Dallat. So, all of those are almost inevitable consequences, even though we do not yet have a firm figure.”
“I am not in a position to give Members a firm answer to that question. The likelihood is that we will be looking at in the region of a 6% cut in this financial year, which, given that we are nearly halfway through it, is a very significant in-year cut that will potentially have very serious consequences. <BR /> <BR />In addition to that cut, some spending areas across the Department will have to make larger cuts because of issues such as the cost of legal aid, with which there are real challenges. Furthermore, we have yet to get Assembly agreement on some of the changes that I have been proposing for some time. So, the reality is that we will potentially see cuts of 12% or 13% in some of the Department's core services. <BR /> <BR />As the Chief Constable said, we are also likely to see an end to police officer recruitment this year.”