Doug Beattie
Upper Bann · Ulster Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“I absolutely accept what the Minister said earlier, which is that she would not have been able to get such a Bill out of the Executive. That is the sentence that you would have heard from me, Minister, had you waited a minute. I absolutely accept that that is the case, and I think that we all do.”
“Just a minute. Minister, I guess that I disagree with you, because I too did my work. I accept that I do not have the resources that you and your Department have, but I sat with the Public Prosecution Service and talked through this very thing, and it said that it was workable.”
“The Director of Public Prosecutions would look at the seriousness of the offence — death by dangerous driving, risk of harm to the public, serial arson, assault, sexual behaviour that is a danger to the public — and he would also look at the best interests of the child, because we have not got away from diversionary measures here.”
“Had James Bulger been murdered by two nine-year-olds, we would probably be having a discussion about the minimum age of criminal responsibility being nine, such was the anger in 1993 when that horrendous crime took place. All the ages are arbitrary, and we need to deal with that.”
“That raises the minimum age of criminal responsibility from 10 to 12. It is not what some people, who want it to be 14, want; it is not what others, who want it to stay at 10, want; but I believe that 12 is right. Why do I presume that a child can commit a criminal offence at 12 years of age?”
“In essence, however, that amendment would raise the minimum age of criminal responsibility from 10 to 14, apart from in the case of the offences in that closed list. It has been said many times, and I will not repeat what has been said, but the closed list does not make sense to me either.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,482 lines we hold for Doug Beattie, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 11 of 30.
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Some will think that this is an unnecessary or contentious debate, but the reality is that the conversation on the matter is happening right across our society. Therefore, it is important that we, as legislators, debate the issue and lay out our position. I hope that the debate can be both robust and respectful while being mindful of the fact that we are talking about lived experiences right across Northern Ireland. The motion falls into three main areas, which I will cover during my contribution. <BR /> <BR />First, it is important that we commit to providing support for minority communities right across Northern Ireland, including, for example, the Travelling community, the disabled, the elderly, the vulnerable and the LGBTQ+ communities, particularly in health, education, dealing with bullying and mental health.”
“— and start acting to stop violence against women and girls. Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker.”
“The processing time for sexual offences in Northern Ireland is approximately 675 days. Our criminal justice system is too slow and too weak, and we need to do something more. We need to stop talking about ending violence against women and girls —”
“There must be detail, guidance and legislation to assist our judiciary. Our judiciary needs compulsory continuous training if judges are to fully understand the issues faced by women and girls. Their language should reflect that understanding. We were all outraged by the judge who told a convicted sex offender to "find a wife" in his summing up. That was awful. There must be pretrial education for jurors on sexual offence trials or if there are any aspects of a trial that may include matters of a sexual nature. That pretrial training must be substantial and not a training package that says, "Watch a video". The judge must be curious about it. <BR /> <BR />The second issue is sentencing. We must use sentencing as a means of saying to people, "This is not acceptable".”
“However, in reality, the councils are bidding for money without a joined-up plan on how best to use it. That makes it absolutely ineffectual, so we need to look at that. <BR /> <BR />The motion is absolutely welcome, and, of course, the Ulster Unionist Party will support it. It raises a couple of issues. For me, the first is education. Education is at the heart of how we deal with ending violence against women and girls. That education must be delivered at every level — in our schools, in our workplaces, to our public services and in various arms of government. Via education, it is important that young men — it is predominantly for young men but not confined to them — understand what sexual consent means. There can be no ambiguity and no blanket "reasonable belief" defence.”
“Violence against women and girls and serious sexual offences in particular are an issue that we will have to face head-on. Lots of Members have mentioned the fact that it is a cross-departmental issue — it is not just for Justice but for Health, Education and the Executive Office. The framework for ending violence and abuse against women and girls is welcome. I added the word "abuse" because it is not just about violence; there is abuse as well. Violence starts with something else, and the word "abuse" needs to be added. However, in delivery, the Executive Office must be far more robust than what I am witnessing from it now. Throwing money to local councils to do something about ending violence against women and girls is, in principle, good practice.”
“Thank you, Minister. You are right, and, in many ways, I am looking at training our workforce. The Northern Ireland Civil Service has implemented a domestic and sexual abuse e-learning package for staff. Can the Minister confirm whether that e-learning package has been rolled out in the Northern Ireland Prison Service so that prison officers and all staff in the Prison Service can complete continuous learning on the issue?”
“I hope that the Minister feels better soon.”
“Minister, I acknowledge the hard work that your Department has done in dealing with paramilitarism. I fed into that work, particularly the language used for paramilitaries. <BR /> <BR />Has the Minister had any discussions with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland or the Northern Ireland Office (NIO) on ending the separated prison regime?”
“Minister, thank you for your answer. Clearly, laws that will be introduced in the future affect people now. For example, in 2030, EU legislation will ban rubber infill on all 3G and 4G pitches. There will be a huge cost in setting up 3G and 4G synthetic pitches for that and in maintaining them post 2030. Have you had any discussions to see what packages we can provide to schools, community groups and sporting organisations to support them in that?”
“The Minister will know that some of us have questioned legal aid's value for money, as well as the need to eradicate fraud and error and, importantly, to provide transparency, for some time. It was brought into stark contrast when nearly £150,000 was awarded to Gerry Adams through legal aid, but I would not ask the Minister to comment on that case. In the interests of transparency, when will the Minister begin to publish once again the list of top legal aid earners in Northern Ireland?”
“<BR /> <BR />There are huge challenges across our health service, but, with the right will and motivation, things can be improved. Things are being improved, and the Minister has brought forward many policies that can change things over the years. We do not need bizarre, self-serving, party political nonsense like today's motion distracting from what really matters. Our health and social care system is far too important.”
“The massive industrial action in 2022 is affecting things today as we talk about the motion. Damage was undoubtedly inflicted, and it has become clear that we have huge problems. True leadership demands integrity, not selfish obstruction, but the motion is riddled with contradictions. <BR /> <BR />We have been put into the worst situation that we have found ourselves in for 100 years. Once again, we face industrial action because promises that were made at the start of the mandate — this reduced mandate — have not been held to. We said that there would be optimism in that we would not make health a party political issue, but the motion does exactly that. Promises were made, but those promises were broken when our health service budget was given to us at a level below what it was in the last mandate.”
“When looking at where we find ourselves with the lack of progress on the children's hospital, the maternity system and waiting lists, we just need to cast our minds back to early 2022. The Executive were edging towards a much sought-after multi-year Budget, which we needed in order to make progress, and proven plans were being enacted across the health service to respond to the growing volumes and changing acuity of the patients who were coming forward. However, those opportunities were literally robbed from every patient and every health worker a few weeks later, when Stormont was collapsed, shamefully, for the second time in two years. <BR /> <BR />We drifted without a Government into an increasingly perilous health situation that, once again, culminated in massive industrial action.”
“Absolutely, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I believe that I am doing that in the context of understanding how we got to where we are. We need to understand that, because we did not just appear where we are today; we got here because —.”
“The only reaction from the DUP Minister was a comment of "guilty as charged" that was made in jest. That is truly galling, as it set the conditions for where we find ourselves today. <BR /> <BR />While the supporters of the motion wish us to join their condemnation of a supposed lack of progress, they also ask Members to ignore the direct action and stubbornness of their party, which served as the sole reason why previous —.”
“<BR /> <BR />If, like those who tabled the motion, I wanted to politicise today's debate, I could easily remind the Chamber that many of the problems that are weighing down on our health service can be directly traced to a disastrous decision taken by the previous DUP Health Minister a decade ago. When Northern Ireland should have been taking decisions to plan and proactively prepare for growing demand, we found former DUP Ministers cutting critical training places and supports, pulling money out of long-established waiting list initiatives and, perhaps most damagingly, deciding to decouple local pay rates from those across the rest of the United Kingdom, believing that it was sensible and reasonable to break pay parity for our health workers.”
“As Members, we are all too aware through our constituency offices and, for some of us, through personal experience of the huge challenges that face our health service. In many ways, the motion is similar to the many others that make their way into the weekly Order Paper, highlighting something that is wrong, followed by a plea for a Minister or Department to do something about it. As we see the eye-watering sums of money involved with the maternity and children's hospital, it is right that the issue demands our attention in a coherent manner. Regrettably, however, on the whole, the motion adds absolutely no value in addressing the issues that we face, It has been put forward with prejudice, I believe, and in a party political manner and does not take into account what went before to put us where we are.”
“During COVID, the Department of Justice necessarily had to spend £4 million on a mass mortuary on the Kinnegar site. Upon the sale of Kinnegar, was there any clawback for the Department of Justice for that investment?”
“We, as an Executive and an Assembly, are struggling to get legislation out. This is not the time to start looking at one strand of the Belfast Agreement, although I understand the reasons for it.”
“The second point that I would like to raise is on the second half of the motion, which talks about looking at a review of strand two of the Belfast Agreement. I am always mindful that we should never tinker with just one part of the Belfast Agreement. I tell you now that, if you start pulling at the thread of strand two, it will have an effect on strand one and on strand three, so I am always mindful of that. I understand what the party is bringing forward in the motion. There is no issue with that, but I am mindful that you do not want to pull at just one thread, because the whole thing could unravel, and the unbalanceable agreement that we have managed to balance could come apart very quickly. All that I will say on that is that we need to be careful. <BR /> <BR />We are in a reduced mandate. We have just over two years left.”
“The Nolan principles of standards in public life, which apply to the Pledge of Office, are therefore not being looked at by the commissioner.”
“My point was not directed at the SDLP for tabling the motion three years after the event. Rather, I am saying that the issue is that the commissioner published her findings quite late. Things need to happen an awful lot quicker. The reality is that the ministerial code is not fit for purpose. We were promised a revised ministerial code following the New Decade, New Approach deal, but we have not yet received it. We were also promised that the ministerial code would be looked at following the passing of the Executive Committee (Functions) Bill, but we are still waiting. <BR /> <BR />From recent engagement with the commissioner, I have found out that the ministerial Pledge of Office does not fall within her remit. When a Minister breaches the Pledge of Office, the commissioner does not have the remit to look at the situation.”
“is absolutely right, but we need much more robust action to be taken, and far quicker and more timely action, when they do not adhere to the ministerial code. I am not sure what is going to be achieved by having a debate about the DUP's failure to attend meetings, three years after the fact, albeit the proposer of the motion did say that it is about highlighting an issue. That is fair enough, as I have no problem with our highlighting an issue.”
“I was, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I will briefly contribute to what is a very short debate about a very important issue. The motion is factual in its truth but narrow in its content, and I have to say that it points at just one party — in this case, the DUP — when the issue of breaches of the ministerial code of conduct goes much wider by far. The truth is this: DUP Ministers' failure to attend NSMC meetings did not achieve anything that they set out to achieve, and we are no further forward today than we were back then. We do need a mechanism to hold Ministers to account, however, but I am not sure what the motion is trying to do about that. <BR /> <BR />I will raise a number of issues. First, the line in the motion that states:”
“I thank the Minister for that answer. I have asked about that on multiple occasions, particularly given the lack of openness, transparency and integrity from some Ministers over the past months, especially with regards to the McMonagle affair and child safeguarding. Does the Minister agree that it is really important that we have that new and amended ministerial code in order to give us confidence that we can hold Ministers to account when we have to?”
“Minister, from a question for written answer, we know that the set-up costs for the commissioners' offices is £8·3 million, with annual running costs of £9 million. Has that money been set aside for this financial year, or, really, are we looking at it not happening until we go into the next financial year?”
“Minister, robust sentencing is another tool for ending violence against women and girls. Does the Minister agree that, when it comes to sentence credit, which is a useful tool for getting the guilty to admit their guilt early, leaving it until the last moment to admit guilt while still getting the same credit is quite negative?”
“There can be recriminations one way or the other — I will leave those up to whomever — but it now falls on the Minister to force through his regional strategy to make sure that women get a better outcome than they do now. <BR /> <BR />I finish by thanking Diane Dodds for bringing the topic to the House. It is a timely and good debate. There is more that we can do as elected representatives to help women access the treatment that they deserve and need.”
“The answer has to be, "Yes, I believe that they are". In the modern era, there should be no reason for any patient or individual to have to wait so long for cancer treatment, care, diagnosis or support. There has to be greater collaboration across trust boundaries in order to target funding to equalise waiting times, establish regional pathways and renew the drive for rapid diagnostic centres and clinics that started in recent years. All of that could have happened to a much greater extent if the cancer strategy had been implemented as was originally envisaged. Instead, it suffered greatly in the absence of the institutions, combined with the absence of a needs-based Department of Health budget allocation.”
“In the three months from April to June 2024, only 11% of patients in the Southern Trust area were seen within 14 days. The target is 95%. Eleven per cent were seen, but the target is 95%. Yet, in the neighbouring Western Trust, that figure was 83%. Southern Trust 11%, Western Trust 83%. It is not acceptable for women in one trust area to have to wait significantly longer to be assessed than women in another trust area, but that is the postcode lottery that women are running at the moment. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the recent announcement of a new regional waiting list for breast cancer assessment, which will enable women to access the earliest available appointment across the Province. That comes back to the discussion about whether people are willing to travel a bit further to get treated more quickly and effectively.”
“I think of the Ladies with Letters and the issues surrounding smear tests and the motions in the Assembly calling for a women's health strategy. I know that there has been a significant campaign to maintain breast cancer services at Craigavon Area Hospital. Women's health is really up there and is incredibly important, nothing more so than breast cancer services and breast screening. <BR /> <BR />Cancer patients and their families deserve so much better than what they currently receive. Far too many people are forced to wait for far too long for a diagnosis and for treatment. Cancer is a disease that does not wait; it often thrives in any periods that delay intervention. The problems are especially bad in breast cancer services.”
“That is what it is. <BR /> <BR />I thank my Upper Bann colleague for bringing this to the House. It is an incredibly important issue, and she articulated the detail of it extremely well. No doubt, in the debate, we will all mention the same statistics as she mentioned. The reality is that it is not about statistics in many ways: it is real life. It affects real people, and, when those real people get a lump and know that they possibly have cancer, it has a real effect on them as a person and on their families. It affects their health but can also be a financial issue. <BR /> <BR />The reality is that many women are concerned about breast screening and breast cancer services across Northern Ireland. I am concerned, as we all should be. Women's health has been highlighted in recent months in relation to many issues beyond this.”
“My hearing is going, do you know that? It really is.”
“because, when you say the word "loyalism", it is linked with paramilitaries, and that is just not fair.”
“or transition — use whatever word you want. <BR /> <BR />It also recommends:”
“Its report, "Reframing the debate: Ending Loyalist Paramilitarism", by Rev Chris Hudson, Dr John Kyle, Trevor Ringland and Professor Graham Spencer is well worth a read. I will not go through all 10 recommendations, but I ask all Members to look them up. The report makes it clear that recruitment has to end, as I mentioned. It recommends:”
“<BR /> <BR />At the end of the day, there is no point in treating paramilitaries as criminals or drug dealers, putting them through the courts with evidence, getting them sentenced and then sticking them into a separated prison regime where they are called "Brigadier". They then get the kudos of being a brigadier, get released back into society as a brigadier and infect their society once more. We have to look at that. Members might remember that, in 2016, I tabled a motion to enable us to deal with that. It failed because political parties did not support me. <BR /> <BR />My last point is on something that the leader of the Opposition raised: the Northern Ireland Development Group has given us 10 recommendations for what it might be possible to do next.”
“My second point is on enforcement. The paramilitary task force needs more resources to enable it to dismantle those criminal groups — all criminal groups, regardless of what flag they fly or what colour they represent — and a commitment is needed from MI5, the National Crime Agency (NCA), His Majesty's Revenue and Customs and the UK Border Force to work with the task force in a joined-up manner. The action plan on tackling paramilitary activity, criminality and organised crime needs to use more stick than carrot, and it must work proactively to help groups to transition. If that means the transition of small groups, it can be that.”
“It is a simple descriptor, but the reality is that they are organised crime gangs, child abusers, drug dealers. Few Ministers would meet representatives of those groups if the headlines said, "Minister meets drug dealers" or "Minister meets child abusers".”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. I was going to mention that, and I will, if I get to it. The Member made the point well. <BR /> <BR />I criticised the Minister, but let us not look at that incident in isolation. The Provisional IRA army council is not the military wing of Sinn Féin. Sinn Féin is the political wing of the Provisional IRA army council. That in itself is an insidious element of our politics in Northern Ireland. Let us not forget that Sinn Féin Members went to Maghaberry in 2016 to meet dissidents and promote their aims. The Cold War stand-off between those who lead our Government will continue and stop society from moving forward. <BR /> <BR />I want to make three points. The first is about the use of language. Of course, we have used the term "paramilitaries". I have used it.”
“If loyalist paramilitary groups really are interested in beginning the process of transition, they can start by stopping recruitment, stopping the collection of membership subscriptions and allowing members to leave without paying a penalty for not being involved in criminality, organised crime, coercion, drug dealing or the exploitation, including sexual exploitation, of their communities. <BR /> <BR />Criticism of a Minister for meeting representatives of structured paramilitary groups is justified. A Minister's only interaction with such groups should be to persuade them to leave the stage. Instead, they have been given a platform where they feel that they have influence. If they have influence, they feel that their existence is justified.”
“That would have allowed the LCC to rebrand itself and become a genuine community council, with women's groups, civic groups, religious and business organisations, sports teams and charities — not paramilitaries — coming to the fore to represent and speak for loyalism. We have seen that happen in the past with individuals. I know former paramilitaries who are on the peace line every night doing fantastic work. We have seen it with the Action for Community Transformation (ACT) initiative and with the Resurgam Trust in Lisburn. It can be done.”
“It is a sad state of affairs that paramilitaries continue to exist and exert control over government and society in such a negative way. We have allowed that to continue while we inadvertently take sides, accept our own narratives and excuse our own positions. <BR /> <BR />When I was leader of the Ulster Unionist Party, I never met the Loyalist Communities Council. I had no issue with meeting it, but I made it clear that, if I was going to do so, the one and only thing on the agenda would be the disbandment of paramilitaries. I would have done anything that I could to help it achieve that aim.”
“— you will see that they need extra space. Will the Minister review those builds to give them that extra space?”
“I thank the Minister, and I thank the Minister's team for winkling out the answer to that question, which I did not word very well. The point that I am making is that an awful lot of private houses are being built in central Craigavon. There is a real concern that, if that building continues at the rate that it is going, we will not have the school provision to support it. If you look at Portadown College, which is getting a new build, Portadown Integrated Primary School and Craigavon Senior High School —”
“It is first class, and I have been to it as well, but I have to say to anybody who is here or listening that the 'Game of Thrones' studio tour really is world-class. It needs to be on the map. Tourism Ireland, Tourism Northern Ireland and Armagh City, Banbridge and Craigavon Borough Council need to do more. I recommend everybody here to give it a wee visit.”
“This tourist attraction is on the link road between Dublin and Belfast. Yet when people jump on the tour buses and leave Dublin, because it is not in the 100 places to go and see, they shoot up to Belfast to go to the Titanic Belfast visitor attraction.”
“On Friday, I visited a fantastic tourist attraction just outside Banbridge. My colleague might talk about it as well because she also visited. I am talking about the 'Game of Thrones' studio tour, which is probably one of the largest indoor tours and tourist attractions in Ireland. It was brought about by a £48 million investment by a US firm, and it employs about 70 staff, full-time and part-time. It is the only official 'Game of Thrones' tour, although there are many unofficial tours. <BR /> <BR />Yet this fantastic tourist attraction does not feature in Tourism Ireland or Tourism Northern Ireland's 100 places to visit. It is an incredible site, and it is working to have up to 400,000 visitors a year in the next five years. Sometimes, you can look at that and think, "Are we too Belfast-centric in Northern Ireland?".”
“Thanks, Minister. You are absolutely right. It is a matter for the Committee, and it has not had that discussion yet. I am probably pre-empting it slightly, but I have given an open, personal thought on the matter, but the Committee will discuss it and decide the best way forward. <BR /> <BR />I will go back to the start of my contribution. I have every confidence in ability of the Chair, the Deputy Chairperson and the Committee to scrutinise the Bill, to work with the Justice Minister and the Department of Justice and to make sure that we produce a Bill that is fit for purpose.”