Claire Sugden
East Londonderry · Independent · Northern Ireland
“That is, gosh, almost 35 years ago, yet we are still having the conversation in 2026. If I were to speak to that eight-year-old girl, I would tell her, "When you are 40, Claire, this will not even be a consideration for you". Sadly, however, it still is. It is deeply disappointing that, when we had an opportunity, it was not taken.”
“Indeed, I tabled an amendment to that Bill to achieve the desired outcome, but, sadly, the opportunity was not taken. One of the strengths of the Assembly is that Committees can identify where Executive legislation has fallen short and produce their own practical, targeted solutions.”
“Frankly, we should be listening. Sometimes, we talk about equality in broad terms, but the Bill reminds us that equality is often about practical things. It is about removing unnecessary barriers from everyday life and ensuring that opportunities and choices do not depend on arbitrary differences between schools.”
“That is ridiculous. The point that we should all pay attention to is that of girls feeling less exposed. We should focus on that even if there were no other reasons to pass the legislation. Girls simply want to get on with their school day without having to think about something that most boys take for granted.”
“That meeting was a reminder that issues that can appear small to adults — there have been adults who have asked why the Assembly is legislating on this — can be issues on which we need to legislate. When people do not behave appropriately, we as a legislature have a responsibility to legislate.”
“Around one in seven couples in Northern Ireland experiences fertility problems, yet Northern Ireland continues to offer one of the most limited publicly funded fertility services anywhere in the United Kingdom. Couples face lengthy waits, restricted eligibility criteria and fewer publicly funded IVF opportunities than elsewhere.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,208 lines we hold for Claire Sugden, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 45.
“The Member mentions hunting in legitimate ways, but we are trying to make the barbaric sport of hunting animals with dogs for recreation illegitimate. If the Assembly accepts the legislation, that will become illegitimate, and we will have to move forward.”
“I have not met one farmer in my constituency who does not advocate for animal welfare and for ensuring that we do not take our animals in vain when we produce them.”
“It is really wrong to present the debate as though everyone living or working in the countryside supports organised hunting with dogs. It is simply not true. We also need to recognise that there is a new generation of farmers who do not accept the practice; indeed, protecting animals and animal welfare is a significant part of what they do, and they want to advocate that.”
“The Bill recognises those realities, but, again, that is very different from organised hunts involving the pursuit of wild mammals by dogs as a form of sport or entertainment. Increasingly, many people struggle to understand why that continues to be lawful. <BR /> <BR />I reject the suggestion that support for the Bill is somehow incompatible with rural life or countryside communities. I live in the countryside. I am an advocate for the farming community. I regularly meet local farmers and listen to their concerns. I try to come to a position for farmers so that they can get on with doing the job that is so important for Northern Ireland and, indeed, across the UK and the world. As other Members have said, rural communities do not have a single viewpoint.”
“Landowners and farmers have raised concerns around disruption, livestock distress and damage associated with hunts; indeed, my only experience of the issue is of constituents talking to me about the negative impact of the activity. Many people also witness wild animals being pursued in a way that really is not justified. I appreciate that some will see those activities differently — they will see tradition, sport or countryside culture — but many others see an animal being pursued for recreation in a way that causes suffering. <BR /> <BR />The distinction between necessity and recreation is important. There are circumstances in which difficult decisions involving animals may, unfortunately, be necessary. Farmers may need to protect livestock; pest control may be required; disease prevention may be necessary.”
“That is the principle at the heart of the Bill. <BR /> <BR />It is significant that Northern Ireland is now the only part of the United Kingdom without legislation in this area. England and Wales legislated more than 20 years ago, and Scotland has since strengthened its laws. I appreciate that there are debates around enforcement there and loopholes elsewhere, particularly on trail hunting, and I expect that some of those issues will be further explored. Other Members have talked to that in their contributions. However, the principle remains important. Hunts happen across Northern Ireland, including my constituency, and people see them happening. They see hounds moving across fields and roads.”
“The Bill does not pretend that all interaction with wildlife can or should cease; it states that, where there is no genuine necessity and where the activity is ultimately recreational, the Assembly is entitled to ask whether the suffering involved remains justifiable. For me, ultimately, that comes back to animal welfare. <BR /> <BR />We have to be honest about what the activity involves. The organised pursuit of wild mammals by dogs, often over considerable distances and ending in injury or death, causes suffering. That suffering does not become acceptable because the activity has existed for a long time, just as something does not become cruel because society suddenly changes its mind. The suffering involved has always existed; the difference is that we are now in a position to decide whether we continue to permit it.”
“We will strengthen it through Committee Stage and Consideration Stage. We will tighten the wording and address the concerns as the Bill progresses. We do not need to reject the Bill at Second Stage on the basis of principles and assumptions that may or may not eventually be realised. We in the Chamber all have a responsibility to ensure that legislation is good, clear and proportionate law. <BR /> <BR />It is telling that the Bill recognises that there are circumstances in which intervention may genuinely be necessary. That is why there are exemptions in the Bill. They exist around livestock protection, pest control, disease prevention and biodiversity management.”
“I do not ever think that it is the thin end of a wedge: when has the Northern Ireland Assembly ever moved fast on legislation? <BR /> <BR />One of the concerns that are repeatedly raised with me is that the Bill is somehow a stepping stone towards wider restrictions on firearms, hunting and other countryside activities. However, the Bill would prohibit the organised hunting of wild mammals with dogs: nothing more, nothing less. It does not ban lawful shooting activities, pest control, firearms ownership, farming practices, ordinary dog ownership or the lawful use of working dogs. <BR /> <BR />Importantly, if aspects of the Bill could unintentionally lead to consequences beyond what is intended, we will strengthen it. We will go through the various stages to address the concerns that have been raised.”
“Absolutely. I am drafting my own private Member's Bill. It would be irresponsible of any of us not to consider that in that context or within the wider legislative frameworks. <BR /> <BR />The debate should be grounded in the content of the Bill before us and not in assumptions about what it might become in future or in suggestions that it represents a wider attack on rural life, farming, lawful shooting activities or countryside management more broadly. I appreciate that Members will say, "This is the thin end of a wedge". I do not know how many times in my 12 years here I have heard that. Legislation does not happen quickly in Northern Ireland, and we are not good at it, compared with our counterparts in other parts of the UK or in Ireland.”
“It is important to remind Members that all law sits within legal frameworks, other laws, precedent and case law. That is how judges interpret the law; it is not just what one Member thinks of it. <BR /> <BR />It is also important to point out that, as Members, we bring ideas to the Bill Office, which transforms those ideas into draft legislation. This is not just something that we have all picked off Google; it is a really important process, and undermining it undermines every one of us who has an opportunity to introduce a private Member's Bill.”
“We also have to remember that the legislation sits within other legislative frameworks and contexts. Sometimes, we cannot remove that from the arguments that take place in the House. We cannot just say that the Bill will do this, this and this. There is precedent and standards. When judges make their decisions, they will look to case law for how they interpret legislation. We cannot just say that the Bill will do such and such. What does the interpretation of particular words and phrases mean? It means something, because someone has already made a decision on it in another part of the framework and the law. <BR /> <BR />I appreciate that Members are trying to poke holes in the legislation. It is absolutely our job to do that, but we must do that at Committee Stage and at Consideration Stage and Further Consideration Stage.”
“That is what the passage of the Bill is all about. Certainly, in principle, I support the Bill. I have gone back to those who disagree with me and have outlined why, I believe, their concerns are misplaced. However, that does not mean that we do not take those concerns forward or consider them. If the Bill needs strengthened in order to reassure those who have concerns, we must do that as part of this process. <BR /> <BR />I have read the Bill alongside its explanatory and financial memorandum, which is not an abstract from the Bill. It is important and provides context, so that, when people interpret the Bill when it eventually becomes law, they do so in the context of what the Assembly intended. It is not something that we can disassociate from the Bill; it is why it exists.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is confusing that so many Members speak strongly and sincerely about animal welfare in other contexts but seemed less willing to apply the same principles when the issue came before the House in the previous mandate. I look forward to seeing who supports the Second Stage of the Bill, particularly those who advocate for it outside the Chamber. At the end of the day, it is about action. <BR /> <BR />I have listened carefully to arguments on both sides of the debate. Like many Members, I have received a considerable amount of correspondence from constituents, particularly from the rural communities that I represent in East Londonderry, which has a significant rural population. They are concerned about the potential impact of the legislation. It is important that we hear those concerns and address them.”
“I support the Hunting with Dogs Bill passing its Second Stage. The legislation is as important now as it was in the previous mandate, when it sadly did not complete its passage through the Assembly. I commend the Member for continuing to pursue the issue, because it has not gone away. It is as relevant today as it was when we last debated it in the Chamber. <BR /> <BR />It is disappointing that, despite the topic being debated in the previous mandate and the fact that Mr Blair said that he would continue to pursue it, nothing has changed and the issue has persisted. That is why the Assembly has to legislate. This activity has been given many chances and there are many examples across the UK that demonstrate that it is no longer acceptable. Northern Ireland had not changed, but now we are forcing that change because it has to change.”
“— is ultimately about dignity. We need to give that dignity back to the people who live this every day.”
“We appreciate that it is a big piece of work, but we need to start to put it in place. We need action now. The debate —”
“That is why it is disappointing that the only Minister in the Chamber today is the Minister for the Economy. We need to look at the pathways and see that this is a Health and Education problem and a Northern Ireland Executive problem. When everybody stood in the Chamber, took their oath and agreed to work together, that is what we expected and what we were elected to do, but that is not happening. We can talk here and be supportive of the motion. I agree with Diane Dodds that, generally, there is support around the Chamber from individual MLAs for the situation to move forward, so where is the problem? Most parties have Ministers on the Northern Ireland Executive, and they can move the situation forward.”
“I think that the Minister of Education is changing legislation in relation to exams up to the age of 19: let us amend that legislation so that we can get take responsibility for kids with special educational needs until they are 25. Rossmar School in my constituency is offering to provide that support because it knows that it has the expertise and that simply putting those children and young people into a day centre is irresponsible and shameful. The Executive should be embarrassed by that, because turning 19 does not remove autism, profound learning disabilities or vulnerability. However, for some reason, in Northern Ireland, it removes support. <BR /> <BR />We need to challenge how narrowly society defines success for those young people. Not every pathway has to lead to university or traditional employment and skills.”
“The Minister of Education could continue SEN provision until age 25 if he had the support of Executive colleagues and had the funding to put it in place. Therefore, it is not fair to say that it should be one Minister over another: if anything, we are repeating the mistakes of the past. When will this Government start focusing on outcomes-based accountability? That means Ministers working together and recognising that it is not about you, your party politics or the election next year but about young people and families who struggle day-to-day to get basic care needs in place. <BR /> <BR />When will the action come? As I said, we have been talking about the issue for 12 years or longer. Right now, we need action.”
“The situation has often been described as a "cliff edge". It has been described as that for as long as I have been an MLA, which is just over 12 years, and, I imagine, for much longer than that. I remember a meeting that I had with a departmental official at which we talked about the issue. That person said, "Claire, that is a great idea, but it is not in our remit" — not our remit, not our problem. To be honest, that is what characterises this Northern Ireland Executive. This is one Government, and Ministers should all be working together around the Executive table. <BR /> <BR />I appreciate that the Minister for the Economy is here, but the Minister of Health should be here, as should the Minister of Education, because it stops at his Department — that is where the cliff edge is.”
“It cannot be enough just to put those diagnostic tools in our GP surgeries. We also have to fund our GPs. We have to give them the confidence to know that it is not just another add-on, separate from their GP contract. <BR /> <BR />I support the motion. I support a clearer, more coherent front door into our healthcare, and I support helping people access the right care at the right time in the right place. Alongside that, however, we need the courage to deal with the wider failures in the system that continue to push people towards A&E departments, because, too often, that is the only door that is open to them.”
“As I said, many of us have had experiences of ending up in A&E simply because there was nowhere else for a relatively straightforward test or assessment to be carried out. I do not mind sharing with Members that I had to attend A&E to get an ECG done. It took minutes to perform, but I waited for hours for those few minutes. The diagnostic process was not readily available elsewhere — in my GP surgery, for example — so the emergency department became the default destination for me. Often, people who attend A&E do not believe that something catastrophic is happening. Rather, they are attending because they need reassurance, monitoring or basic diagnostics to rule out something serious. <BR /> <BR />If we genuinely want to reduce pressure on our emergency departments, that has to be part of the wider conversation as well.”
“If it comes down to simpler and better communication, I definitely think that it is something that the Minister and the Department need to explore. It is one of the more inclusive tools that we could introduce into healthcare. We often talk about digital exclusion, particularly among older people, but we would not be asking someone to navigate a complicated website or app. Rather, it is a straightforward telephone service, with a number that is easy to remember. If anything, we should really be thinking about how older people — the people who will access the service most — will be able to use it. <BR /> <BR />It will not represent a transformation, however, if the services behind it do not have the capacity to respond.”
“That service has its value, and figures show that almost half those who used Phone First and urgent care services in 2024-25 avoided a referral to the emergency department. That tells us something important, which is that when they are given an accessible route into the system, many people safely avoid an unnecessary trip to A&E. Phone First is, however, fragmented and inconsistent. Hours vary across trusts, access varies across trusts and public awareness varies across trusts. It has a really long phone number. I could not even begin to imagine how to start dialling it without googling it, whereas everybody knows 999. Everybody can remember 111, and that is the number that would be used. <BR /> <BR />Northern Ireland does not need to be the outlier here.”
“More often than not, people attend emergency departments not because they want to but because every other part of the system has effectively funnelled them there. <BR /> <BR />Increasingly, we are seeing older people present at A&E: people who have fallen; people whose conditions have worsened because their issues were not tackled upstream; and people who could perhaps have been supported at home, in the community, through social care, through early intervention or through better local access to diagnostics and treatment before things reached a crisis point. That is why I support the principle behind having an integrated 111 service. <BR /> <BR />At present, we have Phone First.”
“What stayed with me far longer, however, was what I saw when I looked around the waiting room. I heard distressed children screaming into the night. I saw older people visibly weeping in pain. I watched vulnerable people become increasingly uncomfortable sitting in chairs for hour after hour because there were no beds and because the staff did not have the space available to deal with the sheer volume of people coming through the doors. <BR /> <BR />The truth is that many of those people did not want to be there either. They were there because there was nowhere else for them to go. They had been directed there by their GP, an out-of-hours service, a pharmacist or another healthcare professional because the support that they needed was not available in a community setting.”
“Like many across Northern Ireland, I have, unfortunately, spent long hours in the A&E over the past year, whether on my own behalf or that of family members. I remember waiting for over 17 hours on one visit. As a relatively young and robust person, I could manage that. It was unpleasant, exhausting and frustrating, but I could cope.”
“I support the motion — at least, the principle of exploring what is being suggested. I suspect that many people across Northern Ireland are surprised that we do not already have a fully integrated 111 service, given that it has become such a recognised and understood part of healthcare elsewhere in the UK. It is simple; it is memorable; and it gives people clear access to the health service at a time when many people genuinely do not know where to turn. <BR /> <BR />Despite the wait times and numbers that we see, most people do not want to go to A&E. Nobody wants to sit for six, eight, 12 hours or longer in an overcrowded emergency department with other sick people unless they absolutely have no option.”
“Following on from Sinéad McLaughlin's comments, we should all be concerned that the issue is prevalent not just in the Southern Trust but across every trust in Northern Ireland. That, in itself, warrants the issue's being given more attention and, potentially, a public inquiry. Will the Minister reconsider on that basis?”
“Minister, have you any plans to update work on understanding the need for social housing and then building housing accordingly, so that, for example, women and children, especially those who are victims of domestic abuse, older people and people with special educational needs are prioritised?”
“— and that includes the island of Ireland.”
“Some are against parties rather than for them. Sometimes, people feel that they are politically homeless. Sometimes, they are angry, and, sometimes, they simply feel that no one represents them. That does not amount to evidence that constitutional change is inevitable or even close. In fact, I do not even think that we are anywhere near it. <BR /> <BR />There is a danger in constantly pushing the idea that major constitutional upheaval is around the corner. People often say that Brexit brought us closer to that, but, if anything, it took us further away. We cannot have another constitutional upheaval on these islands —”
“It offers simplistic but usually wrong answers to deeply complex issues and tells people that all their problems are somehow someone else's fault. People feel abandoned. They have watched successive Governments promise change while public services deteriorate and living standards decline. That frustration is real, even if I profoundly disagree with some of the political conclusions that people are reaching because of it. It is also important to note that it is not just a rise in right-wing politics; it is a rise in the middle and the left. <BR /> <BR />Political frustration does not automatically translate into a united Ireland. Elections are not border polls or opinion polls. The Assembly is an example of that. I do not believe that its make-up would ever represent how people outside it might vote. They vote for all sorts of reasons.”
“Therefore, when people point to failure in those areas, we should be honest enough to acknowledge that many of those failures are not failures of the United Kingdom but failures of devolved government, failures in decision-making and failure to reform, which, at times, have been caused by the absence of government, for which both of the big parties in the House have been responsible in the past 10 years. Changing the constitutional status of Northern Ireland will not automatically fix that. <BR /> <BR />The motion makes a fundamental mistake by trying to link frustration with British politics to support for constitutional change. Yes, I have concerns about the rise of Reform UK and the type of politics that it represents. Populist politics, if anything, thrives by exploiting that frustration rather than solving problems.”
“The purpose of a jurisdiction is not simply to satisfy identity but to organise society in a way that allows people to live well. It is about public services, opportunities, security, rights, responsibilities and helping people to build a decent life. I do not accept that the answer to every difficulty in Northern Ireland is to move that responsibility elsewhere. We are essentially advocating for our responsibility to be taken away. <BR /> <BR />Under devolution, many of the powers that people are concerned about — powers over housing, education, justice and economic development — already exist.”
“I did listen to what you said. I have been listening to what Sinn Féin has been saying for the past 10 years. If we are going to describe Northern Ireland as a failed state, parties across the Chamber that have been involved in the Northern Ireland Executive need to take responsibility for that failure.”
“Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. <BR /> <BR />I appreciate your contribution, Emma, but I struggle to accept the points that you made, because, after 10 years, the first Minister is a Sinn Féin Member, but we are not seeing any progress. Are you saying that you are failing in that respect? If you are —”
“Let us be honest as well that the Republic of Ireland has significant pressures of its own, including housing pressures, healthcare pressures, cost-of-living pressures, political frustration and rising polarisation. The South may not have a Nigel Farage, but it does have left-wing and right-wing politics. <BR /> <BR />The idea that south of the border is somehow immune to instability and division is often conveniently overlooked. If we are genuine about improving people's lives, surely it is the House's responsibility to focus on making this place work, rather than on constantly talking it down. We have already heard Northern Ireland be described as a failed state by Members who have been responsible for governing it for the past 10 years.”
“I do, however, take issue with the constant attempt to frame constitutional change as somehow being inevitable, urgent or the singular answer to the challenges facing people in Northern Ireland today. That is gaslighting. It disregards my aspiration, and I can assure Members that it is not endearing me to the vision of a new Ireland. <BR /> <BR />If that is our answer, what are we really saying to people? Are we saying that the Northern Ireland Executive are not working? Are we saying that every Minister in the current Government is failing? Are we saying that, because we cannot fix our health service, improve our economy or reform public services, let us instead hand over Northern Ireland to another jurisdiction and hope for the best.”
“People today are worried about getting a GP appointment, paying their mortgage or their rent, accessing childcare, finding housing and whether public services will still be functioning in five or 10 years' time, because, let us face it, they are barely functioning now. Those issues are not mutually exclusive to the context in which we provide them, but we should be focusing on them. <BR /> <BR />I appreciate that there are Members whose genuine constitutional aspiration is for there to be a united Ireland. They are entitled to hold that aspiration. They are entitled to advocate for it peacefully and democratically, and I have absolutely no issue with their doing that.”
“As with all MLAs across the House, the number-one issue that comes into my constituency office is housing, and we are being told that more houses cannot be built because the waste water infrastructure simply is not there. Given the engagement that you have undertaken with the various stakeholders, which you outlined in your answer, how confident are you that we will get the money needed for this investment so that we can start building much-needed houses across Northern Ireland?”
“Minister, can you clarify who, if we envisage a new bridge at Kilrea, will be responsible for building it? Will it be the council or the Department for Infrastructure? Your answer to the Member for North Antrim suggested that you are trying to pass the buck.”
“I recognise the points that are made in the amendment: there are lessons in past failures, and we should always be willing to learn from them. However, the core issue before us is straightforward. We have recognised coercive control in law. We now need to ensure that that recognition is reflected in practice. That means commencing the outstanding protections, putting forward the funding so that we can share how consistent it is and ensuring that no part of our justice system can be used to continue that abuse. If we get this right, we are not just supporting victims in that moment; we are breaking a cycle that, left unchecked, will continue for generations.”
“Too often we are responding to the consequences rather than preventing the cause. We are managing the crisis, rather than reducing it. We are, in effect, trying to keep a lid on a problem, rather than dealing with what is driving it. It is not sustainable. Breaking the cycle of trauma requires early intervention, proper support for victims and systems that understand the impact of abuse, rather than simply processing cases. That is where a trauma-informed approach matters, not as a buzzword, but as a way of shaping how our services respond to people when they have experienced abuse.”
“A significant proportion of those issues can be traced back to adverse childhood experiences, and domestic abuse is one of the most significant of those experiences. <BR /> <BR />We see the consequences across the health service, social services and justice system, and, very often, in our prisons. I used to describe — I still do — the Justice Department as the failure Department. That is no disrespect to the current Minister and how she is conducting it. It is a recognition that if every other Department is failing people, those people often end up in the justice system. <BR /> <BR />If we are serious about tackling those issues, we have to be serious about tackling the root cause of domestic abuse, and that requires a more strategic approach than we currently take.”
“If we want victims to come forward and to leave abusive relationships, the system that they enter has to be one that protects them not exhausts them, and the system is exhausting, with the delays and the challenges that they face in those rooms. The system should be there for victims to get justice, but, in many cases, it just discourages them. <BR /> <BR />Coercive control is not just a justice issue. It is a societal issue; a trauma issue. What happens in the home does not stay in the home. Children who grow up in environments where coercive control or violence is present do not leave that experience behind. It becomes part of their development and shapes how they see relationships, respond to conflict and how they cope. Although we talk a lot about mental health, addiction and offending behaviour, we do not always join those dots.”
“What should be a process to resolve issues becomes a continuation of the abuse itself, and that cannot be allowed to happen. If we recognise coercive control in law, we have to recognise it wherever it happens, including in our courts. We cannot have one part of the justice system acknowledging coercive control while another part inadvertently enables it. <BR /> <BR />Access to legal aid is central to that because a victim without representation, facing someone who has already controlled and intimidated them, is not on an equal footing, and we cannot pretend that they are. Also, we need to acknowledge the abuse of legal aid, and how it is used to coercively control people through the courts.”
“Thank you. I appreciate the Minister's point, but that is what we are seeing in practice, and I suppose that it is due to the funding reality. We have to be mindful of the budgets and how we use them so that those things can be more consistent and made accessible to victims in particular. The Government need to be a victim-centred Government, and part of what the Minister highlights is critical to that. <BR /> <BR />One of the most concerning areas is the family court. It is an issue that comes up regularly in my constituency office. Even I am shocked at how often it is raised with me. For many victims, abuse does not end when a relationship ends — it changes form. Court proceedings can become another tool: repeated application delays, attempts to undermine credibility, using contact proceedings to maintain control.”
“<BR /> <BR />The motion is right to highlight that many of the protections in the Act are still only partially implemented and that victims continue to face real barriers when trying to access justice, and we do see that —.”