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 2 of 2.
“I thank Ms Sugden for her intervention. I am glad to hear that it worked out very well in her particular case, but I have to say that, for other people, that has not been the anecdotal experience that I have heard about. People have told me that, with zero-hours contracts, it is very difficult for them to plan for the future and almost impossible to get any sort of mortgage or significant loan from the bank on the basis of uncertain income. I am willing to accept that, in some instances, it will work for people, but I think that, generally, it presents a lot of challenges for people.”
“I know that Mr McCrea challenged the accuracy of the figure of 28,000. I have to be honest and say that I do not care whether it is 28,000, 24,000 or 15,000, the fact is that we have significant numbers of people in zero-hours contracts at the moment. A lot of those people are under 25. They are young people in the very early stages of their career. Is it right for this society to be exploiting people in that way, where they have uncertainty day and daily, week in and week out, not knowing how to plan for the future or what money they will have at the end of the month?”
“The SDLP has been raising the plight of those working on zero-hours contracts for some time at a number of levels: in the House, in Committee and in councils. We are extremely concerned about the issue, as we are about the potential exploitation of people.”
“The answer to that question is extremely complex, because it depends on the nature of the job that the person is carrying out, what is expected of him or her and the nature of the organisation that he or she is working for. There are variations. I am not satisfied that extending the period to two years is justified in this case. In most cases, employers are able to come to an opinion within normal probationary periods for jobs, which are usually three to six months. I do not think that extending the period to two years is acceptable. The SDLP is not prepared to support that under any circumstances. <BR /> <BR />I now turn to amendment No 15 on zero-hours contracts. A lot of information on these contracts has come across in the debate, so I do not want to overplay it.”
“I understand the arguments for the embedding period for people in employment, but, speaking as somebody who, in a previous life outside the House, was directly involved in training people for employment, I had a lot of exposure to people, at all sorts of levels, in the early stages of their jobs. In my view, the risk in extending that period by two years would be not so much about its being used to see whether somebody worked out or was an errant employee, for instance, but, in extreme cases, an employer using it as an opportunity to get rid of people if their face did not fit or the employer was not comfortable with them. We are concerned about that. Not all employers adopt that approach, but it has happened.”
“Thank you very much for that, which I accept. Obviously, it is a matter of concern. I take on board the fact that the timescales may not have allowed it to happen. <BR /> <BR />I turn now to Mr McCrea's amendment No 14. I was perplexed, as were my party colleagues, by the amendment. I spoke to Mr McCrea about it, and he explained the rationale behind it. I look forward to hearing an extended explanation, but it will probably not come as any great surprise to him that, as members of a social democratic and labour party, we will not support it. We believe that the amendment would effectively diminish an employee's rights to extending the qualifying period of employment by one year in relation to a written statement of reasons for dismissal. That would be a backward step.”
“There is, however, a concern about that, with tensions in the public sector and the possibility of its shrinking, and the feeling that, mainly due to cuts in the public sector, people will increasingly be working in the private sector. I accept that many people think that that is the way that our economy should be going, but that seems to be where the greatest risks of pay differentials are. Nevertheless, it is good protocol to investigate gender pay gaps and collect employment information. <BR /> <BR />The SDLP suggests that it would have been positive to include the Equality Commission in the monitoring and reporting section of amendment No 10.”
“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. Even with the legislation in England that Mr Flanagan referred to, the pay gap is still a considerable issue. That was the narrowest difference since figures were first published in 1997, but there has been little change overall. <BR /> <BR />It is positive to say, and Mr Flanagan touched on this, that there has been better news in Northern Ireland about our ability to address the pay gap. It has lessened here, with full-time female workers often earning more per hour than their male counterparts in 2014-15. That, as Mr Flanagan said, is due to the propensity of people here to work in the public sector.”
“I am grateful for the opportunity to speak to the group 2 amendments. There are three issues that I want to touch on: the gender pay gap information; amendment No 14, tabled by Mr Basil McCrea; and amendment No15, which seeks to introduce a new clause on zero-hours contracts. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 10 would introduce a new clause on gender pay. I take on board that its proposer has decided not to move it, but it is still appropriate to speak to it. It would be a welcome step towards fully investigating the extent of the gender pay gap in Northern Ireland. There can be no doubt that it is a matter of concern and that such inequality still exists <BR /> <BR />Last year, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said that there had been relatively little change in the gender pay gap over recent years.”
“Minister, your description today of prosperity and jobs coming forward is, I think, as someone from the constituency of Foyle, almost like Harold Macmillan saying that we have "never had it so good." The Executive's north-west ministerial group met only twice in the last year. Is that appropriate action given the level of disadvantage that we face? Should we be looking at a bespoke measure like a city deal for Derry?”
“Minister, thank you for your answer. Given the previous false dawns in relation to the expansion of the Magee campus, oversight and stewardship of the business case will be critical in the uncertain context of moving from one Department to a new one. Will the Minister assure the House that the same team will work on the business case and that it will be followed up assiduously?”
“<BR /> <BR />We welcome the amendments, and I look forward to speaking on the second group.”
“As the Bill is only at its Second Stage, it is important that the House consider the implications of that extra requirement on the claimant and whether it may prevent access to a fair resolution. That is particularly true when an extra amount of money is required; for example, a deposit to proceed with the tribunal. I share the concerns that Mr Flanagan and Mr McCann outlined around deposits and how that could be detrimental to the interests of achieving justice for those taking a tribunal. I am sure that, as public representatives, we have all dealt with people who have had difficult experiences and been treated badly in work situations. We would not want to have anything in the Bill that will present a problem in taking it forward in the interests of natural justice.”
“<BR /> <BR />The LRA addition is not the only change to tribunal procedure. The Bill includes enabling powers that relate to tribunal rules, and it brings tribunal rules and regulations into line with current practice, permitting the chairmen of employment tribunals to be referred to as employment judges. Secondly, it includes enabling powers to allow the Department to specify in employment tribunal rules the additional circumstances in which a tribunal may order a party to pay a deposit in order to continue with proceedings. That measure is intended to attach a consequence to bringing claims or responses that have little prospect of success. <BR /> <BR />What again may be apparent in the second stage of the tribunal process is the potential for a greater burden on the claimant.”
“It seems that, as stakeholders such as the Equality Commission expressed, an extra layer of relatively informal adjudication would serve only to protect employers from a burdensome process. We are glad, therefore, that clauses 4 and 8 may be removed and that the amendments seem to be more rational mechanisms to provide for neutral assessment and good practice. The question that still needs to be answered is whether that facilitation of early dispute resolution is as fair to those taking a case to tribunal as it is to employers. <BR /> <BR />We are happy that amendment Nos 7 and 8 and the new clauses providing for a review of early conciliation and neutral assessment are to be included. It is right and proper that we examine whether this addition is working in the interests of employers and claimants.”
“I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate. As a new member of the Employment and Learning Committee, I come to this late. On behalf of SDLP Members, I express our appreciation to the Minister, the Department and the members of the Committee. Even from reading the genesis of the Bill and what has happened over the last few years, I know that considerable time, effort and energy has gone into it, and we would like to put that on record. <BR /> <BR />We made a number of points at Second Stage about the Labour Relations Agency, particularly on neutral assessment. Under the Bill, the LRA would be required to establish a neutral assessment service that, by agreement, could give disputing parties an idea of how their case might be decided should they not resolve it between them.”
“I thank the Minister for his assurances. Anybody on the housing list will welcome the fact that new homes are being built. There is debate and consultation about housing associations potentially acquiring former Housing Executive properties. If there is such a policy decision, can current Housing Executive tenants be assured that they will not be detrimentally affected by that process or change?”
“Will the recommendations from the recent Evason panel regarding funding for advice centres be implemented in full? Can people have assurances that they will have high-standard advice on an ongoing basis?”
“I hope that the outstanding issues around the sale of alcohol and profitability will be resolved in the coming mandate.”
“It is right and proper that we too extend rates relief, and I welcome the fact that the Bill has reached its Final Stage. <BR /> <BR />In reference to clause 2, it is a good idea that we will help owners plagued by vacancy. The measure will not regenerate the local economy with sweeping effect. However, it is a small part of the range of measures that we need to bring forward in the House and that will need to be adopted to help our businesses, many of which are struggling at this very difficult time with the state of the economy. Vacancy rates are still much too high and profitability rates too low. <BR /> <BR />The SDLP has been supportive of this legislation since it was introduced. It will provide good relief and assistance to organisations whose purpose is not financially driven.”
“The train of thought was that that advantageous position would have a large effect on other businesses working in that sector. Those concerns were outlined to the Committee on a number of occasions. The issues over the sale of alcohol and profitability should not be a barrier to the progression of relief. It is for that reason that we supported the Sinn Féin amendments at Consideration Stage and Further Consideration Stage. <BR /> <BR />As was referenced at Second Stage, in England and Wales registered community amateur sports clubs receive 80% relief on the rates for premises that are wholly or mainly used for the purposes of that club. In Scotland, mandatory rates relief is given to registered charities and registered community and sports clubs where the premises are wholly or mainly for charitable or club purposes.”
“<BR /> <BR />The law on rates already provides for 80% relief in the case of charitable purposes. The Bill proposes to extend that to community and sporting clubs, and we welcome that. A private Member's Bill was introduced during this mandate, the thrust of which was that community and sporting clubs should have 100% rates relief. The SDLP supported the principles of that Bill and the proposals in the Bill before us today. <BR /> <BR />The hospitality sector raised competition issues with the proposals in the private Member's Bill. Those concerns were over the fact that any proposal to enhance sport and recreation relief to 100% could place licensed sporting clubs, particularly those with an alcohol licence, in a very advantageous position.”
“<BR /> <BR />The first clause provides for a power to enhance rates relief for community amateur sports clubs. That is subject to criteria that will be prescribed in subordinate legislation and subject to affirmative resolution in the Assembly. <BR /> <BR />The second clause enables commercial window displays to be disregarded from occupation for rating purposes. As we heard at Committee Stage, that clause was mainly proposed by the business sector. I agree with other Members that its inclusion shows that the Assembly is responsive to the needs of the business community and that the Department has made some efforts in that regard. The measure is untried anywhere else in the UK, and it is time-bound in the new clause until 31 March 2017, with the potential for extension. Obviously, we hope that it will be successful.”
“I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate at the Final Stage of the Rates (Amendment) Bill. <BR /> <BR />As has been outlined, there are two substantive clauses in the Bill, and the SDLP is supportive of the Bill in general. My colleague Claire Hanna made a significant contribution to the debate and referenced the use of accelerated passage. We are content with the use of accelerated passage, but we urge caution on its use generally, as, in our considered view, it does not give legislation the scrutiny that we should aim for in the House. <BR /> <BR />The Bill had two clauses when it was first introduced in the House. We had the addition of clause 1A yesterday to include pigeon racing, and we flocked to support it when it was voted on. Perhaps we will all end up being amateur ornithologists after this.”
“I thank the Minister for her responses so far. Does she agree that it is shocking and bitterly disappointing that we are still discussing the issue half a century after the initial decision was made to bypass Dungiven?”
“I will take the deputy First Minister's answer in relation to the other matters that he listed, but it did not address the point that I made about disadvantage and the lack of skills among our young people. It is a matter of very serious concern. I would like to know what the Executive will do to battle that.”
“I thank the Minister for his statement and his responses so far. He referred to the SEUPB business plan and the 4% year-on-year savings. Is that level of efficiency sustainable whilst securing output? From reduced sums, we need to get the best impact that we can from these programmes.”
“It was an incident that received considerable media coverage. It has to be a matter of concern for the general public. The Minister said that he is bounded by the review and what is happening there, but, in general terms, are there lessons that can be learned from an incident of that nature?”
“I thank the Minister for the information so far on STEM. How much of the extra £5 million allocated to apprenticeships in the 2016-17 Budget will be used for STEM?”
“It has demonstrated as much. I would like people to support the SDLP amendment before the House.”
“For example, during the recent Brickkiln fire, which was a huge fire in our city and district that burned for approximately one week, it poured water on to the blaze from a high level without firefighters having to enter the building and put their lives at risk. <BR /> <BR />The SDLP amendment to the motion, proposed by my colleague Fearghal McKinney, first asserts that the Fire Service constitutes a critical front-line service and calls on the Minister of Health to seek Executive approval to ring-fence its budget. We already have a Fire Service that can operate extremely efficiently in harsh budgetary conditions.”
“Furthermore, the Fire Brigades Union has said that the planned 5·6% cut would mean that the service will be unable to fulfil its statutory requirements. We must act now. That 5% cut would also lead to the loss of 67 full-time firefighter posts and the closure of three one-pump stations, or one multi-pump station and one one-pump station. Even the slightest cut can make a significant difference. <BR /> <BR />Ms McLaughlin referred to the situation in our constituency of Foyle. The Northland Road fire station recently had to downgrade its VEMA aerial appliance. It could not be manned 24 hours a day, being used only on request. That led to a reduction in personnel of three and to protracted waiting times for using the aerial appliance on fires. The VEMA appliance was often used to good effect.”
“There has been no decrease in demand, and, as a result, the Fire Service has been stretched through operating in a harsher budgetary climate every year. In that time, its budget has been cut by 14·5%. That represents, as has been said, over £12 million between 2011 and 2016. We heard Mr Buchanan say that there is no statement yet about further cuts in the Budget that is to be discussed tomorrow. I am afraid that we do not have that confidence at the moment. We wonder about what is to come. If, as is suspected, there may in fact be another 5·6% cut, the Assembly must ask itself whether it is content that, during the current mandate, it will have removed one fifth of the Fire Service's budget. That is something that we all have to think about.”
“That is a monumental workload for any organisation, and we have to pay tribute to that. <BR /> <BR />We have seen the devastating impact that the most recent local flooding incidents — those in the past few weeks — have had. Importantly, we have seen how acting quickly, which the Fire Service was able to do, played such a key role in the protection of homes and businesses by helping to prevent harm and to limit damages that occurred to property. Any reduction in its budget may lack foresight, as a suite of services that have cross-departmental significance will be affected. <BR /> <BR />Let us look at the Fire Service budget specifically. From 2011, the Northern Ireland Fire and Rescue Service has had to operate in spite of year-on-year cuts.”
“As has been said in the Chamber already, they put their lives in danger, day and daily, on our behalf. We would do well to remember that when we are talking about percentages and trying to save money in the overall Health budget. The fact that the Fire Service is as much of a front-line service as any other is often overlooked. Other than the conventional putting-out of fires, as has been mentioned, the Fire and Rescue Service performs a multitude of other roles, day and daily. Those include the horrific traffic collisions that they have to attend, the work that they have done in recent times, particularly on the issue of flooding, and building collapses. In fact, as my colleague Fearghal said, over the past year, the Fire Service has responded to almost 23,000 incidents.”
“Thank you very much, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker. I support the SDLP amendment, to which I put my name, in support of the Northern Ireland Fire and Rescue Service, and I will come back to that in a moment. <BR /> <BR />First, however, I take the opportunity to pay tribute to my predecessor in the Assembly, Mr Pat Ramsey. Pat served the people of the Foyle constituency with distinction from 2003 until the end of December, and I am honoured to take his place in the Assembly. His hard work, dedication and relentless ability to work on behalf of his constituents are things that I hope to emulate and replicate in my work here. I look forward to it. <BR /> <BR />Returning to today's debate, I pay tribute to the firefighters in the service who have often risked their lives for the safety and protection of others.”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. I want to address my question specifically to educational underachievement as it is outlined in the statement. Given that a number of different sources, from the OECD to the Equality Commission and the Assembly's all-party group, are extremely concerned about underachievement, does the Minister feel that the study outlined by the commission, which is going to last for 18 months — I welcome that the contract has been awarded — will treat this very serious subject with the urgency that it merits, especially as this is a very serious situation that has long-reaching effects for our young people?”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. The SDLP welcomes the bringing forward of the further education strategy. Reflecting on my constituency of Foyle, we know the vital role played there by the North West Regional College in trying to tackle the huge disadvantage that we have in that area. With specific reference to theme 5 and college partnerships, how does resource-sharing work between further education institutions? How will the Department's strategy aim to improve on that?”