Joanne Bunting
East Belfast · Democratic Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“Their input was instrumental in shaping the Bill that the Assembly will shortly be invited to pass. <BR /> <BR />For those affected by the mother-and-baby institutions, Magdalene laundries and related pathways and practices, the process has taken too long, but we can be pleased that we got there, for the victims' sakes.”
“It is still cruel, disheartening and difficult to fully comprehend. I hope that the experiences of the many women who were affected by those institutions and practices will serve as a challenge to us all.”
“We thank all who participated in the Victims and Survivors Consultation Forum. We know that that has not always been an easy space, but we hope that, today, they can reflect on all their efforts with pride.”
“<BR /> <BR />To victims and survivors considering whether to engage with the redress service, I send an unequivocal message: the scheme exists because your experiences matter, and you need not face the process alone.”
“<BR /> <BR />Of course, the experience did not end with the institution itself; rather, for the victims and survivors — those women and children — the period has been a thread of pain that has woven its way through their entire lives.”
“It is not an exaggeration to say that today is a momentous day. It is an honour and a privilege for me to move the Final Stage of this important legislation on behalf of the First Minister and the deputy first Minister, junior Minister Reilly and, indeed, the Executive.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,152 lines we hold for Joanne Bunting, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 6 of 24.
“The truth is that Hamas, much like the IRA, which, in previous years, threatened and punished its own to stop them going to the police, is threatening and beating innocent Palestinians to stop them going to the food centres. Like the IRA, Hamas is fine with people starving to death and using them as a propaganda tool. The truth is that many Palestinians are afraid. They are being coerced and controlled not by Israel but by Hamas fighters — none of them appear to be affected by famine, by the way — who are threatening them with violence if they go to the food distribution centres to feed their families. <BR /> <BR />The message portrayed in the motion reflects only half of the picture, and, as was the case in the previous Gaza debate, wilfully ignores the complex reality.”
“It went on to thank a US representative for supporting its mission:”
“A couple of days ago, Sky News Arabia reported on a new Nutella cafe opening in Gaza, but that does not fit the narrative either. <BR /> <BR />The call to slaughter Jews has been played seven times on Palestinian Authority TV in the past year. That is not in the motion. Yesterday, seven Jews were killed in a terrorist attack on a bus in Jerusalem. An eyewitness said that the driver got off, took a call, returned for his belongings and fled, and then the terrorists boarded and opened fire. There is no mention of that, because that does not fit the narrative. In here, the Israelis have to be the bad guys. <BR /> <BR />Let us get to the reality. Another tweet, three days ago, stated:”
“Sinn Féin claims that it is discredited — discredited because it dispels the lies, perhaps? The thing about Hamas, Sinn Féin and their chums in the IRA and the radical left is that they will never let the facts get in the way of propaganda. "Amir" was reportedly killed by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) in May, but, a few days ago, was found alive and hiding with his mother. <BR /> <BR />Four weeks ago, 900 trucks of aid were sent in. Around 400 to 500 trucks are deposited per week. The truth is that the UN would not pick it up, so it was being left to rot. It took Israel to bring journalists to Gaza to see the piles of rotting food to embarrass the UN into doing its job, but that does not fit the narrative. Eighty thousand babies have been born in Gaza since October 7. They do not say that, because it does not fit the narrative.”
“Those posts are from the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), which, in its bio, states that it is:”
“I will not reiterate my party's position on genocide and famine, as colleagues have done so. I will address other points. <BR /> <BR />I draw Members' attention to some posts. One from 11 hours ago stated:”
“We pray for them and for their safety. We are grateful to them for our freedom and for their service, and we honour those who made the ultimate sacrifice.”
“<BR /> <BR />I say "historic", because this is the first time that a regiment has laid up its beautiful colours anywhere on this island. For East Belfast to be chosen is inordinately special. Moreover, St Mark's Church in Dundela is, itself, a historic landmark, being the former church of CS Lewis. It was a privilege for those of us who were present to stand alongside serving personnel and veterans and their families to reflect, remember and give thanks. <BR /> <BR />We in the DUP are proud of those from Northern Ireland who, despite opposition and threat from some quarters, have chosen the noble career of service in the military. We understand the sacrifice that that requires, including being away from family and loved ones for sustained periods and often putting oneself in danger. We commend the regiment and those in it.”
“<BR /> <BR />Yesterday was particularly poignant and certainly historic, as the ninth set of old colours, which were presented to the 1st Battalion by Her late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II on 6 May 2009, were laid up in a beautiful service. Many of us were honoured to be in attendance on such a meaningful and historic day. Meaningful because of what the colours represent to a regiment: the sacred flags that serve as the physical embodiment of a regiment's honour, spirit and heritage; the ever-present banner standing as a rallying point for loyalty and morale, with them in battle, on parade and everywhere in between — always a source of pride and inspiration; and a powerful reminder of those who went before and all that they gave.”
“<BR /> <BR />There were a number of events to recognise such a significant occasion, which included beating the retreat ceremonies at Carrickfergus Castle and Edenmore, a remembrance service at the cenotaph at Belfast City Hall, a parade and concert in Bangor and, finally, a parade and laying-up of colours in my constituency of East Belfast yesterday. Everywhere they went, the soldiers on parade were cheered and greeted by large and enthusiastic crowds, wishing the young men and women well, delighted to pay tribute to them and their service, revelling in the ceremony, the music, the uniforms and the meaning and history of the occasion.”
“I rise to pay tribute to the Irish Guards in their 125th anniversary year, following a weekend of commemorative events. The Irish Guards are an extraordinary regiment, renowned for their bravery, loyalty, passion and willingness to serve King and country even unto death. Theirs is a proud and distinguished history of unwavering service, and this weekend fully demonstrated their deep roots in and strong connections and bonds to Northern Ireland. It was a joy and a privilege to celebrate the historic milestone with them.”
“I draw the deputy First Minister's attention to paragraph 6 of her statement relating to Intertrade UK. Obviously, the protocol and its bureaucracy are a considerable impediment to internal trade. Was the protocol's impact raised? What was the outcome? Do the Government accept and understand the problems that the Northern Ireland protocol is causing?”
“Do Members find that acceptable? Do they consider that motions such as this will make the lives of our Jewish community any easier? Do they even care? There is zero condemnation of Hamas and its activity in the motion — zero — but maybe that is because birds of a feather flock together, given Sinn Féin's inextricable links. <BR /> <BR />Hamas is a terrorist organisation that exploits and places in danger the very people whom it purports to represent, and it is nothing but a puppet for Iran, the biggest sponsor of terror in the world. As I said, I really do not want Palestinians to suffer, but Hamas could stop what it started. It has chosen not to. When Hamas is defeated and yet another terrorist organisation has failed, the Palestinians will be free, and the world will be a better place.”
“<BR /> <BR />Let us remember that Israel is the only democracy in the region, the only country there with a free society based on Western values and the only one with free and fair elections. Israel has a right to go after terrorists who are inflicting horrific acts on its people and attacking its nation. Hamas knew exactly what it was getting into, because the whole world knows that Israel operates by FAFO. It has to because it is surrounded by nations that want to see it obliterated and wiped off the face of the earth. <BR /> <BR />Every November, we remember — well, some of us do — our war dead and the human cost. Part of that is remembrance of the Holocaust and the horrors inflicted on the Jews by the Nazis. Jews living here — our citizens — are now being terrorised. They are living in fear, as antisemitism is on the rise again.”
“Absolutely, and there is no mention of that in the motion. <BR /> <BR />Assertions in the motion are untrue. Let us be clear, if Members actually want to debate the facts: aid is allowed into Gaza and is getting into Gaza, but Hamas is stealing it. The motion references the targeting of civilian infrastructure, including hospitals and schools, wilfully and blindly ignoring the fact that Hamas is hiding in hospitals and schools and using the people in them as human shields. It is building bases in and beneath them. If those people cared about the people for whom they purport to fight, would those brave Hamas volunteers be stealing their food and hiding in tunnels under their children's schools? Over 600 days on, there are still hostages, and the remains of those murdered have not been returned to their families.”
“If Members wish to go down that road, the least they should do is make it clear whether they are pro-Palestine or pro-Hamas, because their motion does not make that apparent, other than to suggest that they are anti-Israel.”
“There was no outcry about or even a mention of the abhorrent videos showing young Israeli women being kidnapped, screaming and crying for help as they were carried away on the back of mopeds. There was no outrage for the woman — one of many — who was gang-raped and killed in the back of a truck, her stricken body paraded and then left for all to see her degradation. Some in here have the gall to lecture Israel about its humanity — no. Let us put the focus where it should be: on Hamas and the terrorist regimes that support it. Maybe that is too close to home for some. <BR /> <BR />Remko Leemhuis is the director of the American Jewish Committee in Berlin. In the aftermath of the October attacks, he visited Israel as part of a delegation. He said:”
“I have had enough of listening for months in the House to misinformation and propaganda with nary a word about what the Israelis have suffered. Of course, we do not want to see any people, especially children, starving or hurt, but let us get real about what led to this. Some in the House are all too willing to gloss over that. <BR /> <BR />All this comes back to Hamas. It all starts there, particularly following the absolute horrors of 7 October 2023. I do not recall motions coming from those on the opposite Benches to condemn that, when literally hundreds of men, women and children were kidnapped, raped, mutilated and murdered. I do not recall an outpouring of sympathy or outrage from the opposite Benches for the Israeli children who were being brutally tortured and murdered.”
“Rightly, judges are independent, but the Minister is responsible for ensuring the effectiveness of the legislative framework. She is responsible for the effectiveness of the prison system and its rehabilitation services. She is responsible for the court service and addressing delays in it. The statistics and CJINI indicate that there is action but little by way of improvement. <BR /> <BR />We know that, in the Minister's next Bill, we should see increases in maximum sentences and the use of non-custodial methods, but, whatever it includes, it is impact that counts, and the Minister and her Department need to deliver improvements and a framework that will command public confidence.”
“Another fundamental issue in such cases is, of course, that people are sentenced to a ban on keeping animals, but, while the Justice and AERA Ministers continue to bat the issue of a register back and forth, it becomes yet another area of no real progress. Such a ban is therefore rendered worthless, as it cannot be properly implemented or enforced. <BR /> <BR />The Lady Chief Justice (LCJ) has indicated that greater transparency in sentencing would be beneficial, as would the broadcasting of sentencing remarks in some cases. That would undoubtedly help the public to understand the judge's thinking: what was taken into account and how the sentence was reached. However, the Minister has indicated that she has neither the time nor the resources to progress that.”
“<BR /> <BR />Given that various courts have distinct sentencing limitations, what can appear to be a lenient sentence is often the result of the hearing having taken place in a lower court with lower sentencing thresholds. The PPS should therefore, when it can, take care when selecting the court to which it refers prosecutions, and the Department should review which offences are summary and which are indictable. Animal cruelty is an example. In my lifetime, I have never heard of anybody who considered that a perpetrator of such repulsive acts received the sentence that they deserved. If the offence were indictable rather than summary, the PPS would be permitted to take the perpetrator to a higher court, where the higher severity of sentences would better reflect the crime and public feeling about it and act as a deterrent.”
“There is research into the ineffectiveness of sentences of less than 12 months. The cost of the revolving door prison and the impact on victims and society of repeat offenders' crimes mean that rehabilitation is imperative. Resettlement is just as important. The likelihood of reoffending diminishes considerably when a person has a stable home and a job. The release of prisoners on a Friday, particularly in the afternoon, is thus problematic. They do not have sufficient time to present to the Housing Executive or to make proper arrangements. They may be put into a hostel or an empty flat, with nothing, or end up back on the street, which can lead them to return to their previous chaotic life, resulting in reoffending. People in that situation whom I spoke to stated that they felt as though they were being teed up to fail.”
“They are recommended not to engage, lest that be seen as an admission of guilt. That should be looked at and worked through to ensure that any such work in prison is not necessarily regarded as detrimental to their case or an admission of wrongdoing. For people who are ultimately found guilty to be released with nothing to change their behaviour is not only bad for them; it is bad for society.”
“That can lead to some people wrongfully taking justice into their own hands or approaching paramilitary gangs for their version of swifter justice. Delays in the system lead increasingly to remand prisoners being released on time served, which is horrendous for their victims and means that they are unlikely to have engaged in any rehabilitative work whilst in prison. That is far from ideal.”
“Of course, that would not necessarily be straightforward, and it would have repercussions for our prisons etc, but it feeds into a feeling of there being leniency: an approach to crime that is less than vigorous. Sentences should act as a deterrent, but I remain to be convinced that the public feels that they do. Evidence indicates that the public is right, and that is having consequences. <BR /> <BR />The motion states that 80% of prisoners here are repeat offenders. That is a staggering figure, indicative of something being badly wrong and that the system is failing victims and prisoners. Public confidence is also seriously eroded by excessive delays in the system, which show no signs of improvement.”
“Laypeople, Members included, may not fully understand the intricacies and complexities of sentencing, but they certainly recognise what is, in their view, a lenient sentence when they see it, especially for certain types of crime such as sexual crime, which is acknowledged in the motion, and animal cruelty, for which the public is often aghast and disgusted at the sentences meted out. Public discourse has been growing of late, because expectation is increasingly not meeting reality. <BR /> <BR />It is also true that the public struggles with how sentencing works in practice and with the notion that the prison sentence is only part of the sentence that a person has been directed to serve, with the rest being served on licence. There is something of an expectation that someone's sentence should be their sentence, with monitoring to follow.”
“I declare that I have an immediate family member who works in the legal profession. <BR /> <BR />Of course sentencing should not be a populist undertaking but a punishment; a punishment that is commensurate with the crime, that is fundamentally effective and that acts as a deterrent. However, there can be no doubt that sentencing has a significant impact on the public's confidence in the criminal justice system, and, at present, that confidence is not necessarily high.”
“<BR /> <BR />As the DUP's justice spokesperson, I note that, primarily, the aspects for which the Department is seeking consent relate to serious and organised crime, including measures that are likely related to the potential trafficking, smuggling or production of drugs or components for weapons. We are content to support those measures and the LCM that is before the House.”
“The Committee for the Economy advised that, as there will be no material change to the UK National Information Centre's services, it was content with the request for legislative consent for that provision. <BR /> <BR />Following consideration of the LCM that was laid before the Assembly on 15 May and the evidence that was received at the meeting of 29 May, the Committee agreed that it was content with the proposal to extend the provisions in the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill to Northern Ireland by way of a legislative consent motion.”
“Officials advised that the articles in question would rarely be used in everyday business. A pill press, for example, is not an item that a person would usually have, and its primary purpose is likely to be associated with criminal activity. A defendant caught with such an item would not be required to prove innocence, but, instead, to provide a plausible explanation as to why they had it. If they were able to do so, the burden of proof would revert to the prosecution. The Department therefore considered that measure to be proportionate for the offences. <BR /> <BR />The Committee also asked the Committee for the Economy for its views on the provisions that will fall under the remit of the Department for the Economy. Those relate to the validation of fees that are charged in relation to qualifications.”
“I am aware that the Department wrote to the Committee on Friday to advise of an amendment to clause 33(9), which will fall under the scope of this LCM. Although that correspondence was circulated to Members in advance of today's debate, the Committee has, obviously, not had the opportunity to consider it. I therefore cannot speak on the Committee's behalf in respect of that. I do note, however, that the Department has advised that the Minister is satisfied that the amendment will strengthen the clause to make it explicit that the Secretary of State must consult with the DOJ before making regulations. <BR /> <BR />I return to the oral evidence session on 29 May. The Committee also asked questions regarding the reversal of the evidential burden of proof in relation to articles that are used in serious crime.”
“The Committee questioned the officials on whether the Department or the Assembly would have a role to play in considering the regulations and was advised that the Secretary of State for Transport would have the power to make the regulations and that, although there was no role for the Assembly to play, the Department of Justice would be consulted on them.”
“The Committee was further advised that the Department had shared that information with the HRC, which had nothing further to add at that time. A written paper from the Department stated:”
“The officials advised that the Department had been able to work through all the points that had been raised and that it was content to proceed with the LCM. <BR /> <BR />Members also asked officials about the input of the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission (NIHRC) and whether its views on the compliance of clauses 30 to 33 with article 2 of the Windsor framework were similar to those outlined in the Government's human rights memorandum. The Committee was advised that, as recommended by the NIHRC, the Department had sought an expanded memorandum from the Home Office, with the latter confirming that it had conducted its own article 2 analysis and was content that there was no diminution of rights.”
“Officials advised that the initial engagement from Westminster had been with the First Minister and the deputy First Minister and that the Bill had moved through its legislative stages in Westminster at pace, thus making the legislative consent process particularly challenging. Ultimately, the Committee was informed that the Department did not want to risk laying an LCM when it did, as it was concerned that the Bill might complete its passage and gain Royal Assent before the summer recess period at Westminster. <BR /> <BR />Committee members, understandably concerned about the LCM process, questioned officials on whether they had had sufficient time to consult partners, as necessary, on the provisions for which legislative consent was being sought.”
“A legislative consent memorandum was laid and a motion seeking consent was tabled under Standing Order 42A(4)(a) the very next day, however, before any further engagement with the Committee took place. At the Committee meeting on 29 May, departmental officials explained that a memorandum not seeking consent should have been laid under Standing Order 42A(4)(b) around the time that the Committee received the initial briefing on 23 April, so it was laid later than intended, in what officials described as an "administrative error". <BR /> <BR />Nevertheless, the clock had started on the process before the Committee had received its oral briefing, hence members expressed frustration at the time that was available to scrutinise the LCM.”
“The paper further advised that, in due course, a legislative consent memorandum would be laid and that a legislative consent motion would be tabled, subject to Executive agreement and the views of the Committee. The Committee agreed to request an oral evidence session with departmental officials to discuss the proposal, which was subsequently scheduled for 29 May. A memorandum dated 13 May that advised that consent was not being sought was laid by the Department on 14 May. The memorandum stated:”
“I speak again as Chairman of the Committee for Justice and make the same declaration of interest as I did previously. Once again, the Minister has already explained the purpose and detail of the LCM, so I will focus on the Committee's approach to it and, indeed, the process followed for it. <BR /> <BR />At its meeting on 1 May 2025, the Committee considered a written paper from the Department of Justice advising of the Bill's introduction and outlining the provisions for which legislative consent would be required. The Department's paper also advised that, as the legislative consent memorandum could not be laid within the time frame that was required under Standing Orders, it was the Department's intention to lay a memorandum under Standing Order 42A(4)(b) in order to ensure that all Members were aware of the Bill.”
“<BR /> <BR />In a previous debate in this place, we discussed the impact and extent of spiking, particularly on young women. To see a stand-alone and modernised offence is also a step forward. <BR /> <BR />Overall, we in the DUP welcome the LCM and the strengthening that it affords regarding various offences. We support it and commend it to the House.”
“<BR /> <BR />In the course of Committee scrutiny on the LCM, we sought several reassurances around various matters relating to registered sex offenders to ensure that the community protections were not diminished and around the self-harm offences, as I outlined earlier, that could also be used by those with sinister ends. However, the irony is not lost on us on this side of the House that the mother of Parliaments wishes to enhance the offence of encouraging or assisting self-harm whilst, deeply regrettably and shamefully, passing far-reaching legislation on the ending of life through abortion and assisted dying legislation. I reiterate that we in the DUP value life and cherish its sanctity and dignity at every stage.”
“Following a visit to the National Crime Agency as a member of the Policing Board, I am aware of the difficulties that currently exist when such images of abuse are discovered, because, of course, as a result of technological advancement, the first thing that enforcement must establish is whether the child in question is real or is, in fact, a generated image. Time spent on that is essentially time lost in potentially saving a child, so a law that ensures that those images, too, are an offence must be welcomed by all right-thinking people and is another step towards the law keeping pace with crime.”
“I will now speak as Justice spokesperson for the DUP. Of course, we welcome any good legislation that closes gaps and strengthens the hand of law enforcement. We welcome the new offence of cuckooing. It is important that legislation is in place to deal with that rising crime, which is already happening in Northern Ireland. It is entirely wrong that homes, including those of the vulnerable and elderly, are exploited in that manner. <BR /> <BR />We are delighted to see additional powers against those who would seek to encourage and educate others with regard to child sexual exploitation images and to use AI for such sinister and depraved purposes.”
“During that session, officials responded to further queries from members about the removal of RSOs from the sex offenders register. Officials also outlined the implications should legislative consent not be approved for the provisions that are outlined in the LCM. <BR /> <BR />Having considered the written and oral evidence that was received, the Committee agreed on 29 May that it was content with the proposal to extend the provisions in the Crime and Policing Bill to Northern Ireland by way of a legislative consent motion.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Department and PSNI's responses both advised that the procedures and criteria that will be applied by police when initiating the removal of an RSO will mirror those that are already in place to manage a request for removal from the register by an RSO themselves. The Department's response clarified that it is already an offence under existing legislation to commit an act that is capable of encouraging or assisting another person to take, or to attempt to take, their own life. The Department also informed the Committee that, at that stage, due to ongoing policy development, consent was not being sought on clause 95, which relates to the GB driving licence database. <BR /> <BR />A further evidence session with departmental officials was held on 29 May.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee engaged further with the Department on matters relating to the notification requirements for the management of sex offenders and access to the DVLA database and sought clarification on whether the reference to "encouraging or assisting serious self-harm" extended to suicide. We also sought information from the PSNI on the parameters or guidelines that will be put in place for the powers under which the police can initiate the removal of an RSO from the requirement for indefinite notification; that is, removing them from the sex offenders register.”
“<BR /> <BR />At its meeting on 1 May, the Committee considered the Department's response, which included the advice that the Department had received from the NIHRC and the details that were requested on new offences, regulations and information-sharing agreements. The Department clarified that provisions in the Bill relate to information that is held under Part III of the Road Traffic Act 1988, which does not apply to Northern Ireland. Those provisions, therefore, cannot apply to licences that are issued in Northern Ireland. The Department also set out its view that the provisions in the Bill that relate to registered sex offenders (RSOs) and amendments to the paedophile manual will increase protections for children and are, therefore, in line with the UNCRC.”
“We also sought follow-up information on a range of issues, including the Home Office human rights memorandum; the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission advice; details of international law enforcement information-sharing agreements and who has access to the relevant databases; clarification on why the provisions apply only to the GB driving licence database; information on the consideration of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC); information on any potential costs to the PSNI of implementing the proposed new measures; details of penalties or sentences that are to be applied to any new offences; and information on any forthcoming regulations in relation to the LCM, including what procedure will be applied.”
“It was noted that, although the Committee had been informed that the Department could not share certain information with it at that time, the Department had liaised with the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission (NIHRC) and the PSNI on the Bill. The Committee agreed to invite departmental officials to provide evidence and to answer questions on the Bill at its meeting on 20 March. A number of our questions were answered during that session.”
“The Department advised that the current legislative programme means that it would not be possible to bring forward equivalent legislation via an Assembly Bill before the next mandate at the earliest and that any delay in legislating in the areas that the Minister outlined would create lacunas, as she said, thus leaving Northern Ireland more vulnerable to serious and economic crime. It was, therefore, the Department's view that an LCM was the most timely, reasonable and proportionate way to proceed. <BR /> <BR />At our meeting on 27 February, Committee members expressed concerns about the lack of engagement on the Bill until that point.”
“The Committee also requested a clear indication of the time frame for the Bill's introduction. The Department responded by stating that, as details of the Bill had been shared with officials in confidence and were not yet in the public domain, it was unable to share any further information at that time. <BR /> <BR />On 26 February, the Committee was informed by the Department that the Bill had been introduced in Parliament the previous day. The Committee was asked whether it was content in principle for an LCM to be sought on the transferred matters that extend or apply to Northern Ireland.”