Gerard Diver
Foyle · Social Democratic and Labour Party · Northern Ireland
“I thank the Minister for her response and look forward to the results of that review. Will the Department ensure that it is taking into account the significance of that particular roundabout, which is, obviously, on a cross-border route?”
“Are there any thoughts or plans in his Department to reduce the qualifying period that people have to meet to have their heating upgraded to a more modern system, such as the modern gas system, given that this would be a very clear way of taking people out of fuel poverty?”
“I thank the Minister for his answers to date. Minister, despite listening with interest to the range of measures that you are putting in place to help general practice, in my constituency in the west, we are aware of falling numbers of trainees coming into general practice, and the scheme is undersubscribed year after year.”
“First Minister, do you agree that the £150 million identified at Stormont House is inadequate to deal with the issues of victims and survivors and that, given the £30 million alone that is mooted for Stakeknife and the new work by the Lord Chief Justice on inquests, there is actually a need for a major uplift in the moneys required?”
“That is why the SDLP expressed support for the Sinn Féin amendments on zero-hours contracts and called for action to be taken. That said, I accept the Minister's comments that perhaps it might have been better had we been able to deal with that in the Bill.”
“I, too, welcome the opportunity to speak at the Final Stage of the Employment Bill. As a relative newcomer to the House and the Committee, I have to say that I am very impressed by the stewardship of the Bill through the House, the assiduous way that the Committee has worked on it, and the way that the officials have engaged with the Bill…”
The complete record
Every one of 88 lines we hold for Gerard Diver, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 2.
“Are there any thoughts or plans in his Department to reduce the qualifying period that people have to meet to have their heating upgraded to a more modern system, such as the modern gas system, given that this would be a very clear way of taking people out of fuel poverty?”
“I thank the Minister for her response and look forward to the results of that review. Will the Department ensure that it is taking into account the significance of that particular roundabout, which is, obviously, on a cross-border route? A lot of traffic, not just in the Foyle and Derry area, goes through it; the route is transnational in nature. A much-publicised incident recently involved the PSNI; even they had an accident on that route. Whatever the criteria used in the Department, can we ensure that roads that are of particular risk are brought to the top of whatever list is being considered?”
“I thank the Minister for his answers to date. Minister, despite listening with interest to the range of measures that you are putting in place to help general practice, in my constituency in the west, we are aware of falling numbers of trainees coming into general practice, and the scheme is undersubscribed year after year. What effect is that having on the strategic goals for GPs in Transforming Your Care, considering that one GP said to me only today that falling numbers make the Transforming Your Care plans impossible?”
“First Minister, do you agree that the £150 million identified at Stormont House is inadequate to deal with the issues of victims and survivors and that, given the £30 million alone that is mooted for Stakeknife and the new work by the Lord Chief Justice on inquests, there is actually a need for a major uplift in the moneys required?”
“The worries include the policy direction under Transforming Your Care and the fact that day centres are ill-equipped. Transforming Your Care's direction may be putting pressure on parents not to send their children to a day-care centre. The TYC principles of greater care closer to home are praiseworthy in themselves, but a different set of circumstances applies to those with a learning difficulty and their families. There is quite clearly room for improvement in day-care settings and for alternative provision. <BR /> <BR />The report is a very welcome step towards improving work opportunities and day opportunities for young people with a learning disability. I commend the Committee for the work that it has done and, importantly, those who gave evidence that aided its completion.”
“It is very clear that employers need help with providing work experience and placement opportunities for those with learning difficulties. I hope that the report can be a helpful step to securing that. <BR /> <BR />In the final recommendation that I will speak to, the Committee recommends that the Department of Health reviews and continues to monitor its day opportunities model and works with the relevant Departments and health and social care trusts on the development of continued learning and progression in a day-centre environment. Day opportunities and alternatives to day-care provision are increasingly important to people with a learning difficulty. There are numerous worries about day-care opportunities for people with learning difficulties. Yesterday, we had a very passionate plea on the steps of the House in relation to those.”
“An evaluation of the Workable (NI) programme found in 2010 that only 9% of participants moved to an unsupported employment role. <BR /> <BR />Recommendation 34 is focused on the idea that DEL develops a coordinated service, securing placements and seeking employment opportunities for those with learning disabilities, to which they could get buy-in from local employers. In evidence groups, it was argued that it is inefficient to have several Departments carrying out the same role — that is, securing placements and seeking employment opportunities. It was suggested that employers buy into a central authority. This authority would have even greater authority as it would represent many Departments, and having all the programmes in one place would lead to a more streamlined and ultimately successful provision of placements.”
“Recommendation 33 urges the Department to review the adequacy of the support that it currently provides to people with learning difficulties in their place of work. Young people with a learning disability are twice as likely to be NEET as those without a learning difficulty. It can often be very difficult for them to get and sustain work. Too often, work carried out by people with learning disabilities is described as work experience and does not lead to a real pay package or a real job role at the end of the day. One of the key findings in the report, as noted by the Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People (NICCY), is that, while government employment schemes have worked, they do not often lead to lasting and rewarding employment engagement.”
“Social enterprises are offering real opportunities for young people with a learning difficulty to find work experience. The House should do all in its power to support them in this endeavour. The Committee's recommendation gets to the heart of those problems and urges the Department to engage with employers to find appropriate work experience opportunities for young people with a learning difficulty. Furthermore, under the new strategy for people with disabilities, DEL should continue to support employers, social enterprises and any other employment group that is already providing work experience. <BR /> <BR />There are two recommendations on opportunities for work for people with learning difficulties.”
“The Committee heard from parents, who are delighted when work experience is available in a school. Unfortunately, that is not happening enough. An overriding concern of parents is that they know that they will have to source work experience for their child when they leave school. I think that we all agree that situations can be stressful enough for the parent of a child with a special educational need without the added stress of having to source work experience without assistance. <BR /> <BR />The Department pointed to a number of barriers to getting employers to provide work to a young person with a learning disability. Perhaps they are not confident about working alongside a young person with a learning difficulty or cannot offer the necessary time that it would require to support them.”
“Recommendation 32 states that DEL, as part of its new strategy for people with disabilities, canvasses local businesses and industry for work placements and work experience. That would have the added benefit of opening up an engagement with businesses to detail what government needs to do to support businesses to take on this role more readily. The main thrust of the evidence heard by the Committee on this issue focused on the importance of work experience and the current lack of provision. It was found that there is a need to provide work experience for young people in schools so that they can be better prepared for working life.”
“I very much welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate on the inquiry into special educational needs provision in Northern Ireland. As a latecomer to the process, I fully acknowledge the contribution of the Committee, and of the officials as well. I particularly thank the Chair of the Committee, Mr Robin Swann, for his very kind comments about my predecessor, Mr Pat Ramsey, who is incredibly passionate about the subject. I am sure that Pat will be heartened to hear those words today. <BR /> <BR />I will focus my comments on recommendations 32 to 35, which deal with work experience, opportunities to work and day-care provision.”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. In overall terms, Minister, do you think that there is any potential for this to affect the broader levels of support available for graduate and postgraduate students?”
“I genuinely hope that we will see movement on issues such as the gender pay gap and zero-hours contracts in the not-too-distant future. I look forward to seeing how the Act will look in practice, and I await the results of the review into early conciliation and neutral assessment to ensure that they are not overly onerous or unfair on the individuals concerned.”
“I know that there was quite a bit of discussion around that issue. It brings the regulations on tribunals into line with current practice, permitting the chairmen of tribunals to be referred to as employment judges. This, amongst a whole raft of procedures, will be a positive step towards creating better conditions for those who find themselves in an employment dispute so that people, rightly, can expect and hope that they will get the level of justice that they should through a tribunal. Much of the Bill follows in that way as positive reinforcement of the employment rights of the worker. <BR /> <BR />As it is late in the mandate, attempts were made to include other things in the Bill, and much of the debate became about those issues. It is clear that many more issues within the scope of the Bill remain unresolved.”
“That is why the SDLP expressed support for the Sinn Féin amendments on zero-hours contracts and called for action to be taken. That said, I accept the Minister's comments that perhaps it might have been better had we been able to deal with that in the Bill. However, such is the injustice around the issue that I think it would have been worth trying to drive forward whatever change we could in relation to zero-hours contracts. <BR /> <BR />We recognise the sentiment behind the Alliance amendment at Further Consideration Stage that the Department be empowered to take action on those contracts. We know that some effort was made on that, but we really do urge that action be taken in the short term rather than the longer term with a very drawn-out consultation exercise. <BR /> <BR />We also welcome the Bill's enabling powers around tribunals.”
“The outworking of the debate on the Bill and the subsequent amendments has assured us slightly, but the commitment in the Bill to review neutral assessment is particularly welcome. <BR /> <BR />As we know, there was much debate on the issue of zero-hours contracts. The SDLP expressed its serious concerns around the issue. I, personally, believe that it is shocking that we have 28,000 workers in Northern Ireland employed on zero-hours contracts, 40% of whom are aged below 25 years. That is the age group where the NEET people are as well; so, otherwise, we would expect many of those people to be in that group. So, they are particularly vulnerable, and I think that it is appropriate, as Mr Flanagan said, that we should, at some stage in the new mandate, turn our attention to addressing that issue more effectively.”
“I, too, welcome the opportunity to speak at the Final Stage of the Employment Bill. As a relative newcomer to the House and the Committee, I have to say that I am very impressed by the stewardship of the Bill through the House, the assiduous way that the Committee has worked on it, and the way that the officials have engaged with the Bill's process to date. <BR /> <BR />Much debate has ensued over the Bill, and the number of amendments that were tabled is testament to the level of engagement that we have had in the House on these very important employment issues. There are many positive aspects to the Bill, but there were some issues on which we expressed concern. The LRA is a positive move towards handling disputes more effectively, but we had some concerns on the notion of a heavier burden on the claimant through the deposit fees etc.”
“I thank that the Minister for her answer. With that in mind, was there a high level of awareness or consultation with, in particular, arts and cultural organisations that were involved very deeply in the City of Culture year on eligibility for that funding and on how this funding was likely to be rolled out?”
“In the Minister's earlier answers, she referred to an ongoing package of funding that her Department has made available for cultural legacy projects connected to the City of Culture across the north-west. Obviously, we are aware that the new sports and leisure complex in Dungiven is one of the projects that has been able to benefit from that. We much very welcome that facility as the people of Dungiven are certainly deserving of it.”
“Are the moneys to fund the subregional stadia programme going forward likely to come from the £100 million borrowing that was agreed at Stormont House?”
“No McCarthy-esque measures should be allowed, with people being blacklisted and marked for the rest of their working lives where potential recruitment or participation in trade union activities are concerned. The SDLP, as a party, is obviously extremely supportive of that. In that light, we support the amendment as it is put. <BR /> <BR />We have rejected amendment Nos 26 and 27. I know that a valid petition of concern has been put in on those amendments, so we will not be voting in favour of them.”
“Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker. As has been outlined, amendment No 23 refers to the issue of blacklisting and, more specifically, to the creation of an offence of using blacklisting and stricter punishments, including prison sentences, for those who are caught involved in this process. While I accept that there is, perhaps, a lack of full understanding and knowledge of the extent of blacklisting, nonetheless we understand that it happens in some cases. It is entirely repulsive that any individual should find themselves on a blacklist, as a result particularly of activities that they have done protecting the rights and interests of other workers, such as participation in a trade union or a dispute.”
“Let us face it: most organisations do not have trade secrets, although I accept that there may be circumstances in which there are particular aspects with intellectual property or specialisation, but, in most employment circumstances, those things are rare. In the amendment, the duty to satisfy an exclusivity clause is right and proper. There are very few instances in which the contracts can be justified. <BR /> <BR />We support amendment No 16, which requires the Department to make regulations about the number or proportion of zero-hours workers whom any one employer may employ.”
“<BR /> <BR />Amendment No 9 is an amendment to amendment No 8. It stipulates the working conditions, should an employee decide to take up a period of work when not properly notified, as referred to in amendment No 8. The amendments up to amendment No 11 represent the further strengthening of the position of those on zero-hours contracts, who, for too long, have not had equal rights in the workplace and have often been abused as a result. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 12 is particularly important. Exclusivity clauses have been the bane of many people struggling in employment and who have been trying to make a living or support their families. In many instances, it is simply illogical to require an employee to work for only one organisation and perhaps receive only a few hours per week and low pay.”
“We are talking about a two-tier employment system where some people are treated differently from others; in effect, they are treated as second-class citizens in employment. That is wholly unacceptable. I, and my party, believe that the House cannot and should not stand over that under any circumstances. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 8 requires employers to give employees reasonable notice — 72 hours — of changes to the commencement or cessation of an employment period. Those amendments seek to give those on zero-hours contracts the same rights and entitlements as those on fixed-term or longer contracts. We in the SDLP agree with that. I ask the House how, in all reasonableness, anyone who believes in the fair and equal treatment of people in employment can have any difficulty with that.”
“<BR /> <BR />Amendment No 6 requires minimum hours for a worker's employment to be supplied at the commencement of the contract. That amendment does not attempt to specify how long those hours have to be. It will give a prospective employee a firm indication of the working span to anticipate from their employment. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 7 is in relation to equal treatment, which is a particularly important point. The clarification in the amendment is welcome; it calls for proper overtime rates to be paid to essentially all workers. That is a sentiment that the SDLP supports. One of the main areas of abuse of zero-hours contracts by employers is that those employees have fewer rights in the workplace.”
“When we think about it, those contracts are limiting people's lives; they are limiting their ability to plan for the future and to have the reasonable things that people would like to have for their family and children. We cannot forget the long-term effects that people constrained in zero-hours contracts have to contend with daily. <BR /> <BR />At Consideration Stage, I pointed to a study by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development that found that over 60% of those on zero-hours contracts wanted more hours but could not get them from their employers. I do not think, and neither does the SDLP, that that is a satisfactory situation. We said that we wanted detail as to how zero-hours contracts could be abolished in a reasonable and logical way.”
“In terms of the legislative duty imposed on a Department, we do not believe that that is strong or robust enough. The Department may, basically, do what it considers to be appropriate on zero-hours contracts. In our view, that does not represent the sort of impetus and zeal that we need to see to deal with the iniquity of the situation. I cannot stress enough to the House — Mr Flanagan and others have outlined it — the number of people in all sorts of roles and responsibilities who are being exploited under zero-hours contracts. We cannot afford to be ambiguous in the language that we use. <BR /> <BR />As I said at Consideration Stage, those contracts are often used by unscrupulous employers. In many cases, they are used to avoid paying employees properly and giving them the other reasonable employment rights that one could expect.”
“We said that we would have liked to see greater detail on how the prohibition of zero-hours contracts would be carried out, and I welcome the greater detail provided in today's amendments. <BR /> <BR />The Alliance amendment on zero-hours contracts states:”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak to the group 2 amendments. At Consideration Stage, I stated that the SDLP was against zero-hours contracts and supportive of the Sinn Féin amendments.”
“<BR /> <BR />As to the particulars of the agency, I look forward to hearing the debate, but the SDLP certainly supports the creation of an agency to oversee this very important matter.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Oxford Economics report shows that, if we were to pay a true living wage — not the Chancellor's proposed increased minimum wage — net employment in Northern Ireland would actually go up. When those at the lower end of the labour market are paid more, they will contribute more readily to the local economy, and that in turn will stimulate growth and have a multiplier effect on the economy in general, not to mention that employees who are better paid show greater commitment to the organisation and high productivity levels. Following the adoption of the living wage, PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC) found that turnover of contractors actually fell from 4% to 1%.”
“That said, we have heard outlined, over the past months, some concerns about the potential effect of the living wage on microbusinesses and employers who have expressed an inability to pay without incurring job losses. Obviously, that needs to be watched on an ongoing basis. <BR /> <BR />Evidence on the living wage shows that the better you treat an employee, the more valuable that employee becomes in an organisation. The living wage may not be the barrier to growth that smaller businesses feel it to be. We are dealing with human beings, and, around the world, it is the same notion: in general, the better you treat people, the more you will get out of them in any employment situation.”
“<BR /> <BR />A point made at Consideration Stage, which is true, is that there is a general inequality in the level of caring responsibilities between the two genders. The gap appears to be wider for older women, women from ethnic minorities and women in certain occupations. The information that the amendment seeks could help us to put in place action to eradicate gender inequality in the workplace, and the SDLP certainly supports that. <BR /> <BR />Amendment Nos 18 to 22 are concerned with the proposal to create a living wage agency. First, I would like to put on record that the SDLP fully supports the idea of a living wage.”
“An Equality Commission code of practice, published in 2013, provides practical guidance to employers on how to promote equality of opportunity and to avoid sex discrimination in pay structures. This is, in the opinion of the SDLP, simply not enough. That is why we are happy to see, in amendment No 4, provision for a strategy on securing equal pay in the workforce to be brought within 18 months. That is, at its very core, a request for information on the gender pay gap. Many important factors, including a legacy of discrimination, have played an important role in gender discrimination in the workplace over the decades. Roles predominately carried out by women are undervalued by many, and men have dominated the best-paid positions.”
“That is being ratified in today's amendment.”
“As we know, the difference here in Northern Ireland has thankfully not been so stark of late, but the case remains that we do not require companies to publish pay statistics to the level that we would like to see possible. A notable difference to the amendment, rather than the version in England within the Equality Act, is a duty to publish gender pay statistics to trade unions and within the workplace. <BR /> <BR />The Minister made the point at Consideration Stage:”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak at Further Consideration Stage and to support the amendments. In addressing them, I very much welcome amendment Nos 1 and 2. I know they are the product of discussion in Committee and at Consideration Stage. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 4 relates to gender pay information. As Bronwyn said, the arguments for that were well rehearsed at Consideration Stage. I know that, at that stage, the proposer decided not to move the amendment, but the SDLP is on record as being in support of the principles behind the amendment at that stage. Last year, the ONS said that there had actually been relatively little change in the gender pay gap over recent years. In the UK, the gap between women and men's pay for full-time workers was 9·4% in April 2015 compared with 9·6% in 2014.”
“The Committee Chairperson has outlined his position on the matter. However, given the commissioner's thoughts on the matter, which are that he feels that it is inappropriate that he should oversee the complaint, it is only right that we proceed along these lines. We will support the motion.”
“The Member said that employers have a fear of employment law. Part of the question is why we have employment law. We have employment law and protections so that people cannot be exploited as they were in the past. Any employer that treats their employees with dignity and has that fundamental relationship where they work and they are paid in return for the work that they do should not have anything to fear from employment law.”
“The Member is talking about how we can make things better, but it seems to me that the thrust of what he is talking about is how we can make things better for employers rather than employees. Obviously, we need to have effective employers who are able to create jobs, but we need to protect the interests of the employees who are being exploited.”
“We support the Sinn Féin amendments on gender pay equality and zero-hours contracts, and we are extremely concerned about Mr McCrea's amendment to extend the employment qualifying period to two years. That concludes my remarks on the group 2 amendments.”
“The principle of zero-hours contracts is something that, as a society, we all have to be concerned about. <BR /> <BR />As I said, the SDLP is against zero-hours contracts and is supportive of the Sinn Féin amendment. That said, we would have liked to have seen greater detail on how the prohibition of zero-hours contracts will be carried out. I accept that, in view of the proposer of the amendment not moving it today, there is potential to flesh out many of these ideas. <BR /> <BR />We retain some concerns about the Bill. The provisions in group 1 may make tribunal proceedings more onerous for the claimant. We welcome the review amendment submitted at Consideration Stage.”
“I hear what the Member is saying, but, in some respects, he is being facetious by giving that example. It is not unreasonable that people should expect some minimum threshold of hours, no matter what arrangement they have with an employer, whether it is part-time or full-time. In some instances, in certain sectors, when people have zero-hours contracts, they literally do not know how much they are working from one week to the next. They may present themselves at their place of work to find out that they have work or do not have work that week. I do not think that any employee will be able to dictate to their employer what hours the employer will be able to offer them, but it is not an unreasonable expectation to have some sort of minimum threshold. I accept that that has to be debated in the future.”
“I do not accept that, I am sorry. We will have to agree to disagree on that one.”
“I am sorry, but I think that, for somebody is in a situation where they are on a zero-hours contract and they have been offered three or four hours a week, if that is the only work that they can get, and they have to take it because they have no alternative, in a way, that is, in my considered view, a form of exploitation because the employer decides. The power resides with the employer to decide the number of hours they are willing to give the employee. The employee needs the work and must work to eat and take their lives forward. In my view, there is an element — potentially at least — of exploitation in that.”
“I think there is a need to look at the HR needs in those sectors and at how they can be dealt with and managed properly.”
“<BR /> <BR />In my and my party's view, zero-hours contracts are a way that can be used by some unscrupulous employers in some cases to avoid paying employees properly and to avoid giving them other reasonable employment rights. A study by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development found that over 60% of those in zero-hours contracts wanted more hours and could not get them from their employers. I do not think that is a satisfactory situation. <BR /> <BR />As regards the Minister's remarks about the likelihood of creating chaos in the health and education sectors, again, I think that goes back to how we calibrate these things and look at creating employment opportunities in those sectors. I do not believe it would actually create chaos.”
“I understand that that is a perfectly logical approach to the issue. I have to say that, ideologically, I disagree with it. I think that part of the problem here is that we have bought into some sort of neo-liberal view of how people should work. What we need to do is go back to the blackboard, back to scratch, and try to recalibrate things in a way that is fair and by which we can create proper employment opportunities, particularly for our young people. I think we have a responsibility as a community to try to create appropriate employment opportunities and to have them presented in such a way that means that those young people are treated fairly and, even if they are on a relatively low salary, they can at least have some dependency on their likely income month in, month out.”