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 18 of 30.
“People have said to me multiple times that the Stormont House Agreement is not perfect. Of course it is not perfect, but, under that agreement, it is an amnesty for those people because there were no fatalities. That is why we cannot support it. That is the reality. That is what you are saying. In one breath, you are saying to everybody, "We do not support amnesties", and, in the second breath, you are saying, "As long as there was no fatality, I am happy enough to support that guy not being brought up". In case anybody thinks that I am extrapolating something that is not there, the first thing that I did when I became the justice spokesperson for the Ulster Unionist Party was to write to the PSNI and ask, "What happens to the injured? Do they get an investigation?".”
“Under that agreement, if you are kidnapped in Northern Ireland, taken across the border into the Irish Republic, tortured and murdered, you do not get an investigation because the agreement is geographically fixed. If you had a HET desktop review, you would not get an investigation. That is the reality of it.”
“That is why I say that it is an opportunity lost. I can stand up and say that it is an opportunity lost, so I would not not support the motion because I do want to see justice for Pat Finucane. However, I cannot support the motion because I do not support the Stormont House Agreement. It is an amnesty for perpetrators, and you have all signed up to it. The Ulster Unionist Party may well be the outliers, but we have not signed up to the Stormont House Agreement, because, under it, if you lost your legs, if you were burned, if you were blind, if you were psychologically damaged, if you were left in a wheelchair and nobody was killed, you would not get an investigation.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. Absolutely, and that categorises why people try to get rid of those who are from the justice community, including Mr Finucane, who — I will say it again and will always say it — absolutely deserves truth and justice, as does his family. However, let us not forget the likes of magistrate Thomas Travers, whose whole family they tried to exterminate. They tried to murder him. They tried to murder his wife. They murdered his daughter Mary, a 22-year-old teacher, as she was coming out of mass. That was an assault on the judiciary. <BR /> <BR />The motion includes not even a passing comment on any of those murders.”
“Elected UUP member Edgar Graham was murdered outside Queen's University in 1983. Judge Maurice Gibson, who was in his seventies, and his wife were murdered in 1987. All those murders were wrong. All those victims deserve justice. However, the opportunity that is missed by the wording of the motion absolutely belittles those very people. We need only have put in the motion that we reflect on those murders, because they were an assault on our judiciary.”
“I reflect on Mr Kelly's words at the start, which were that the debate should be dignified because we are talking about victims. I will attempt to be dignified. However, I must say that I am disappointed with the motion, which was an opportunity to say that many people out there are suffering and deserve justice in exactly the same way. <BR /> <BR />Without a shadow of doubt, Mr Finucane deserves justice. However, the moment that we start to categorise and say that, because he was a lawyer, he deserves something extra, we forget about the rest. What about members of the judiciary? Resident Magistrate William Staunton was murdered in 1973 outside a secondary school. Resident Magistrate Martin McBirney was murdered in 1974. Judge Rory Conaghan was murdered in 1974. Judge William Doyle was murdered in 1983 as he left midnight mass.”
“Thank you, Minister, and it is almost as though you looked at my supplementary and gave me the answer straight away. It was about embedding staff within the headquarters of the Northern Ireland Prison Service (NIPS) because it is unique in the way that it delivers its service compared with other parts of the Civil Service. Will you extrapolate a little on what you just said? Do we know how many people we are likely to put in as part of that team at the grade that was recommended?”
“First Minister, I will not labour the point, but I thank you for your leadership as our First Minister. Of course, we all have disagreements, but we can believe that you honestly wanted to do the best for this part of the United Kingdom, and I thank you for that. <BR /> <BR />I want to follow up on the previous question. Will the Bill go through a full legislative process? Maybe you are doubling back on yourself. Is there an expectation that it will get Royal Assent before the end of the mandate?”
“We must take notice of that. It is a plea to everybody: do not say, "They are on my side, and I can justify what they did", when you cannot. We should look at what is happening and what has happened in our past and work for reconciliation. Part of that is to give a simple impact statement: "What we did on that day was wrong. What happened to those families in Ballymurphy over those three days in 1971 was wrong". I commend the families in seeking justice.”
“<BR /> <BR />My thoughts today are with their family members as they think back to the times that they could have had with the loved ones who were killed over those three days. I commend them for seeking justice. Everybody deserves truth and justice, even when the truth and justice are hard to hear. For 50 years, that is what the Ballymurphy families strove for. I met them a number of years ago. It is the only time that I met the families. They gave me their testimony, which was harrowing back then and has been confirmed by the coroner.”
“In 1971,180 of our citizens were murdered as part of the Troubles. The year after that, nearly 500 were murdered, and many more thousands were injured. Northern Ireland was on fire. Sectarianism was taking hold. Three-way gun battles took place virtually every day. We were descending into chaos. Some people will paint themselves into a corner and will never criticise anybody whom they deem to be on their side. Let me be clear: as an ex-soldier, I will criticise anybody when I think that they are wrong. What happened at Ballymurphy over those three days was wrong, and, because of what happened, 10 people — nine men and one woman — who had aspirations for the future and had families to be with and loved ones to share a life with were killed. They were totally and absolutely innocent, and they should not have been killed.”
“Minister, I apologise that I was late coming in and did not hear your previous answers on this. I welcome the news that the permanent disablement payment scheme will be open for applications in June. Can the Minister outline when, even at best, it is likely to start paying out?”
“It does not matter what any of us say here today, because the reality for me will be what the Minister has to say and how she takes this forward. Conversion therapy needs to be banned, it needs to be banned now and it needs to be banned before the end of this mandate. <BR /> <BR />Please express your opinions, but do not paint this as something that it is not. This is not about attacking anybody's religious freedoms. This is about banning a harmful practice that is damaging our young and old alike.”
“I never knew Lyra McKee, and she will never see the "better" that she foresaw. As we remember Lyra McKee two years after her murder, it is incumbent on all of us to reach inside ourselves to change this practice of conversion therapy. Nobody is tackling anybody's faith, but if it is coercive and controlling, we have to stop it. I believe in the promotion and protection of all spiritual beliefs, unless they are coercive in nature and directed deliberately at the LGBTQ community to create a sense that they need that fix or cure. <BR /> <BR />We can all play with words today, and I hope that we can all look at each other at the end of this and say that we have been respectful to each other. I want to be respectful to everybody in this room.”
“promotes the idea that they do need a fix and do need a cure. That may not have been the intention, but that is what it looks like, that is what it feels like and that is what our LGBTQ community sees it as being. I cannot support it, and I will not support it. However, I ask respectfully, and I say this respectfully, with no political mischief to my friends in the DUP: do not move that harmful amendment. Do not move it. I will not play political mischief with you; I will applaud your moral courage. The amendment is damaging to the people of Northern Ireland. It is damaging to a community that has long been damaged. <BR /> <BR />A young female member of the LGBTQ community once said:”
“That is an evangelical group. I understand that people have religious views, and I respect them. I have always respected them, and I will not denigrate them in any way. <BR /> <BR />I cannot support the amendment, because removing the line:”
“No, I am sorry, Jim, for time reasons, I will not give way, but I will listen to what you have to say. <BR /> <BR />A person of faith should support banning conversion therapy not in spite of their faith but because of it. The evangelical group Left Side Up said:”
“The intent of the motion is not to limit anybody's faith or belief or their ability to express them. I do not believe that private prayer about sexual identity, conducted in a supportive, affirming way, is conversion therapy, unless it is subversive and harmful. I do not believe that pastoral care is about changing someone's gender identity, unless it is deliberately targeting the young or the vulnerable with the intent to do so. The word "intent" is incredibly important. If the intent is to change somebody's sexual orientation or identity, it is wrong. It is trying to convert.”
“<BR /> <BR />I have to say to everybody here and to anybody listening that this needs to be stopped, and I will keep saying that. Those are inhumane, cruel practices that are detrimental to people's mental health. <BR /> <BR />We have issues of faith, and I do not want to get into a theological debate with anybody in the Chamber, as that would not be helpful. However, last year, just under 400 leaders of the world's main religions called for an end to conversion therapy, and every main political party in the Chamber has stated that it wants to ban conversion therapy. <BR /> <BR />Many have tried to frame this debate as an attempt to stifle religious freedom. That is not the case. The right to preach, pray or counsel somebody who seeks support should not be diminished.”
“"A significant risk of torture", "inhuman", "cruel": those are words that should shake us all to the core when we think that some of our people here in Northern Ireland — our brothers and our sisters, our sons and our daughters, our teachers, our policeman, our nurses and our doctors — are subjected, or could be subjected, to that. It should shake us all, yet it is happening here in Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />We have a charity, with charitable status and everything that goes with that status, conducting conversion therapies here in Northern Ireland. It is part-funded by the International Federation for Therapeutic and Counselling Choice, which says that witnessing domestic violence or suffering sexual abuse can make you gay. My word. So, if you are subjected to domestic violence or sexual abuse, it can make you gay.”
“The British Psychological Society for Northern Ireland chairperson said that conversion therapies are unethical and unsupported by psychological evidence and that her society is committed to ending the practice. She said that sexual orientation and gender identities are not mental health disorders. However, those subjected to exclusion, stigma and prejudice may well experience mental health issues as a result. She went on to say that it is important that the public are made aware of the risk and the harms of conversion therapies. <BR /> <BR />The UN independent expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity said:”
“Why would we say that a gay man can be fixed or cured? Why would we say that there is a therapy to change a gay man into a straight man? There is not. It is ludicrous. If you believe that being gay, lesbian, bisexual, trans or gender-diverse is a lifestyle choice, there is nothing that I can say to you today that will change your mind. If that is what you believe, that is what you believe. <BR /> <BR />Conversion therapy is humiliating and harmful, and having listened to testimonies of individuals who have undergone conversion therapy, it is clear that it has far-reaching negative mental impacts. The continual promotion that somebody is broken or wrong leads them to feel that they are worthless, and extremes lead to suicide.”
“I thank the Minister for Communities for being in attendance and look forward to hearing her response to the debate. Although this is an Ulster Unionist Party motion, I accept that a lot of parties have fed into the debate on the issue, not least the Alliance Party and Paula Bradshaw, who only a number of weeks ago brought forward a petition asking for a ban on conversion therapy. Everybody therefore has a vested interest. <BR /> <BR />I have always been told that, when you open a debate, you should say something profound to engage everybody in the room. I do not have anything profound to say, but here is what I will say: I am a straight man. I was born straight, and there is no fix or cure for me or any therapy that will make me a gay man. Why on earth therefore would we say that a gay man was not born that way?”
“I thank the Minister for that fulsome answer. I absolutely appreciate that the matter is outside his control. I know that he is working hard on it. However, he will agree with me that it is absolutely ridiculous that the waters around Northern Ireland can be classed as a third country when fishermen go into them. It is one of the ludicrous aspects of the protocol. <BR /> <BR />My question spins off slightly from that. What influence does the Minister have to ensure that Northern Ireland's fishermen get their full quota from the new quota system and extra fishing quotas post-Brexit?”
“<BR /> <BR />The point that I make is this: sometimes we forget about the man and look at the position; sometimes we look at the privilege and do not focus on the person who gave so much of his time and helped and supported over 800 charities. He was one of the World War II generation, and we have to remember that. Those wee quips that I have given — they are quips; they are just small things that speak to a man, a father, a grandfather, a great-grandfather and a husband — give you a sense of the person. While remembering that Her Majesty The Queen has lost her husband and a family has lost a father and grandfather, today, I just remember him for who he was: a person who showed real compassion, real understanding and real empathy and who wanted to do the best that he could for everybody, particularly those here in Northern Ireland.”
“He asked me, "What regiment is that?", and we had a conversation about my tie, which is a not a regimental tie but an instructor's tie that you are given when you complete your selection course to be an instructor at Sandhurst. By the way, it is the only thing from that time that still fits me. We then talked about the knot in my tie. For those who do not know, if you are not an officer, you are not allowed to have a Windsor knot in your tie. You have to have a different knot — I do not know what it is called — because you are not allowed a Windsor knot. When he said, "What sort of knot is that?", I remember saying to him, "Well, it's not a Windsor knot; I'm not allowed it", and he said, in colourful language, "Well, that's ridiculous". It is a Windsor knot now, by the way.”
“<BR /> <BR />The second time that I met him was about six years later at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst (RMAS). I was a colour sergeant then and an instructor at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst. It was slightly more informal; it was a bit of a meet-and-greet, grip-and-grin session. He walked around and met people, and we all had a conversation with him. He came to our table, and I remember the conversation that we had. We had a conversation about this tie. Yes, this tie is that old. It is as old as you, Jonny Buckley”
“I did a capabilities brief and talked to him about what we were doing and what we were trying to achieve; I explained that to him. What struck me was how much interest he had, not necessarily in the capabilities that I was explaining to him but more in the young soldiers — men and women — whom we were sending over here and his concerns for them and the families that would be left behind when they were sent over here. He had a genuine concern and a real compassion. The conversation, however, was about far more than that, because he had real concern about the people of Northern Ireland — both communities, all corners, every faction. He expressed a real desire to see peace in Northern Ireland and to see us live in peace together. That was absolutely genuine, and it gives a sense of the man to whom I was speaking.”
“I was very fortunate to have met His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh on two occasions. The first occasion was in 1992 or maybe 1993. I was in my previous employment. I was a young sergeant at the time, working at the Northern Ireland training advisory team, training major and minor units to come to Northern Ireland to deal with the issues that we had here.”
“Your apology was poor. It was not an apology. In the four minutes that you gave us, nothing changed. The apology needs to be about what you did. You organised and delivered a funeral and a wake outside the rules and regulations. You have to apologise for that; that is what you have to do. My friend Mike Nesbitt apologised fulsomely — I felt it — and he apologised to me and my party in private. That was a measure of integrity. Claw back your compassion. Claw back your integrity. Claw back your moral authority. Apologise and then resign. That is where we are. <BR /> <BR />In the last 30 seconds that I have, in the context of the debate, I say to people: do not let Sinn Féin set your moral agenda on this particular issue. Please, everybody, adhere to the health regulations. Do not break them. Doing so will cost lives.”
“You are the deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland and you are the Finance Minister, and you have shown no integrity, moral courage, compassion or understanding for the very people that you tell us that you represent. I am not talking about anybody in the context of green or orange, but about the everyday people who go to work every day to make a living and who adhere to the rules that we set and that you broke.”
“Let us see the outcome and get some meat on the bones of a decision that was taken that was fundamentally wrong. We know that it was wrong. <BR /> <BR />This is what it feels like for ordinary people out on the street. It feels like a criminal, maybe a thief, has gone before the courts, got away on a technicality and has come out sneering, only to do the same thing all over again. The difference is that this matter did not even get brought to court, even though so many other people have been brought to court. <BR /> <BR />This debate will not have any binding outcomes. It is an opportunity for us to express our views, and people will know that we are just doing that. The Sinn Féin Ministers will hope that it is all forgotten about in the days and weeks to come. However, it cannot be.”
“It was because he adhered to the rules. <BR /> <BR />The PPS findings are absolutely staggering. Although we watched it all unfold on TV — people deliberately breaking the rules — the PPS said that it could not see them breaking the rules. It was there for all to see on television. There were 24 recommendations for prosecution, but none have been taken forward. Mary Lou McDonald and Gerry Adams were not even questioned or investigated, and no file was put forward. Why not? It is staggering. I wrote to the DPP on Tuesday night and said that the decision is having a material effect on my constituents and he must review it. I do not know whether he took my letter and said, "Let us review this matter", or somebody else did that, or lots of people did it. However, it is being reviewed.”
“On reading them, you can recount the hurt that has been delivered on those people, because they saw one group getting something that they were not allowed, and that was to be able to say goodbye to their loved ones in the manner that they wanted. <BR /> <BR />Kellie Armstrong's contribution on the issue was very moving. Dolores outlined that although members of her party and her friends had loved ones who had died, they could not attend their funerals. These contributions highlight the issue well. Integrity shown by parties that adhered to the rules and regulations. Of course, my friend Mike Nesbitt lost his mother. There could be no fanfare, no funeral, no lining the route, no ushers, no black and whites, no 2,000 people coming out onto the street. I could not even attend my friend's mother's funeral to show him support. Why not?”
“I will not, Paul, if you do not mind. I just want to shoot through it. <BR /> <BR />Nicola Mallon, Mike Nesbitt and Claire Sugden raised the issue that the guidelines were said to be confusing. That is an absolutely embarrassing defence. If I were going to organise something, no matter what it was, a garden event or anything, the first thing that I would do is get out the rules and regulations and read them, because I may well have forgotten them over time. That is not a defence, and it should never be one. It cannot be a defence. <BR /> <BR />Many Members will have received emails from constituents, outlining the hurt that they have felt over this past number of months. I have received moving emails; even last night I received them.”
“That is the reality. If they had shown political understanding, they would not have done it.”
“They even organised the wake, as Mr Stalford clearly pointed out. They proudly said, "We organised the wake", even though the rules stated you were not allowed to have a wake. There were signs pointing out to people how to go to the wake. That was compounded when the party refused to apologise and show contrition. They simply promoted the idea that they were above everybody else and that they had some kind of privilege that we do not. The IRA army council directed how the funeral should be done because it wanted to remember one of its own.”
“I have to say, regrettably, that is justified because he is the head of a police force like no other. This is not Kent or the Midlands: this is Northern Ireland. We have a very distinct policing issue and, unfortunately, he has, in many ways, failed to understand that. <BR /> <BR />Please let us not lose sight of what happened. The very fact that the issue came about is because a political party — Sinn Féin — sat down in ministerial positions and made rules and regulations that they told everybody to adhere to and they did not. They just did what they wanted to do, and they cannot get away in the smoke as we start focusing on other people. It was not a decision made by mistake; it was a decision taken deliberately knowing the consequences. They organised the funeral in detail with the police.”
“However, like many people in this place, I have to reiterate that we cannot lay the blame on the rank-and-file police officer who has to interpret a set of regulations, written by us, that has to be delivered at the sharp end of justice; mistakes will be made. <BR /> <BR />People have pointed out the mistakes made by the gold commander at the funeral. Yes, he has made mistakes. Absolutely he has made mistakes. If he had worked on the enforcement aspect of the engagement, we may not be where we are today. If he had simply said, "You know what, you see that Milltown eulogy? It's not acceptable, it ain't happening. Go away and rethink that", we may not be where we are today. <BR /> <BR />The Chief Constable has come under serious scrutiny and criticism.”
“In making a winding-up speech on the motion, I will reflect on nearly two hours of robust debate that was heated, certainly passionate, moving and angry at times. The debate ebbed and flowed, as it has done inside and outside the Chamber, about bereavement and how we remember lost loved ones, which, as Paul Frew said, goes to the heart of our society. <BR /> <BR />I thank everybody for their contribution to the debate. I timed Sinn Féin's contribution: it was four minutes. Four minutes of a two-hour debate to set out their stall on the matter. It is just not good enough. Absolutely not good enough. We needed to hear more; we heard nothing. The party doubled down on the position it held before we came to the House today. <BR /> <BR />Policing and justice has been damaged. Of course it has been damaged.”
“I thank the Minister for her statement and update. She covered a range of issues. It gives us a really good direction, but I am always concerned that that direction could be undermined if outputs do not match what the Minister is trying to achieve. I have represented a military veteran who had to live in the Mourne mountains for three years because of the slowness of the family courts, and also a father who received a contact order two years ago but is yet to have contact with his children. Such outputs could undermine the very sensible approach that the Minister has taken. What are we doing to ensure that resident parents comply with court contact orders?”
“When the FICT report is released — I will support the motion to have it released — some people in the House will look at it and say, "I don't agree with that element, but I agree with this element. I don't agree with what you are saying about bonfires, but I certainly agree with it about memorials". We will have to be ready for that when it comes out and to stand over it. Political parties sitting here today that say that they do not know what is in the report are not being truthful: they do. I do.”
“Partly, it was not agreed because, in 2018, Sinn Féin said, "We are not going to talk about the Irish language in the FICT commission any more because it is being discussed elsewhere". <BR /> <BR />Symbols and emblems: not agreed. Flags on street furniture: not agreed. Flags on public buildings: not agreed. Implementation and oversight: not agreed. There are elements in the FICT report that will give us food for thought and something to take forward in order to move some of the issues on. However, the FICT report will not be a panacea that will fix our problems; it will create another discussion. We need to be ready for that discussion and honest in it.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. That is why, as a society, we are not addressing the harmful nature of issues such as memorialisation, and we need to. For me, it was a key point, and it was not just a key point for one side or the other; I was talking about everybody. We should be looking after the victims not the perpetrators. Not only was the issue of memorialisation not agreed, neither was the issue of languages.”
“However, we have to take into consideration the person whose family member was murdered by the UVF who has to walk past a UVF memorial every day and the hurt that it causes them, or the family that had a loved one blown to pieces by an IRA bomb, only to see it memorialised year after year. <BR /> <BR />However, my recommendation — I thought that it was a good one — to reduce memorials failed. It was not taken forward and was not agreed. Most military memorials have been withdrawn and are now in the memorial garden in Palace Barracks, and most front-facing RUC memorials have been taken away and are now at the back of police stations, yet we could not even say that we would reduce harmful memorials to save our people who have to look at them every day.”
“They may set up another conversation that we will have to have, and a working group may not necessarily be a bad thing. We certainly need to see the report. I have no issue with that; I think that it should be put into the public domain. However, it will not give us the answers to many of the issues that were raised. <BR /> <BR />Let me give you an example. I made a simple suggestion on the commission that we should reduce the number of memorials in Northern Ireland, bearing in mind that there are more memorials in Northern Ireland to murderers, rapists and child abusers than there are to their victims. That was a very simple recommendation. The argument was that we all have to be able to remember our dead. That is a fair one; I have no issue with that.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is worth remembering that the commission was not just about flags; there was an awful lot more. It was a massive remit. It covered education; the media; sport; language, culture and heritage; the public space, including arts in the public space; symbols and emblems; flags in public spaces; flags on public buildings; bonfires; murals; memorials; remembrance; and commemorations. It was a huge remit to try to get through. <BR /> <BR />If anybody thinks that it was easy to reach agreement or, indeed, that we reached agreement on all those things, they are sadly mistaken. However, there were some great discussions, some great ideas, some innovative thinking and some fantastic arguments. The commissioners worked incredibly hard. However, I am not sure that the commission's report will have solved all the problems that we face.”
“First, I register an interest. For my sins, I was a commissioner for three-odd years and know the workings of the commission. Secondly, I pay tribute to the commissioners. There were seven political representatives representing the five political parties. They know what they did, and they know the information that came back from it. There was also civic representation, and there were academics who had an awful job to do in a political minefield. I pay tribute to Dominic Bryans, the joint chair with Neville Armstrong; Katie Radford, who was the only female on the commission, and that was an imbalanced commission because we needed more female voices; Mukesh Sharma; Tom Hennessey; David Robinson; and not forgetting the dedicated secretariat from the Executive Office.”
“We have to do this in the most positive way that we can. Negativity in driving this forward will not help us one bit.”
“<BR /> <BR />I finish by again thanking the Minister, the Chair and other Members for feeding into this debate.”