Clare Bailey
South Belfast · Green Party · Northern Ireland
“It is a great relief to finally be able to move my Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) Bill at Final Stage. When I was first elected, I pledged to the people of South Belfast that I would work hard on equality issues, for human rights-compliant legislation and, particularly, for women. Today is the last sitting day of the mandate.”
“Yet, despite "Stay at home" messaging and regulations to prevent public gatherings, the concerted campaign of harassment and intimidation against women and staff continued unabated, and all authorities — the Health Department, the Department of Justice, the PSNI — claimed that they could do nothing to stop it.”
“The efficacy of the Bill is achieved without being unnecessarily heavy-handed or putting significant additional pressures on any criminal justice system. I hope that we can move on from those debates. <BR /> <BR />This is absolutely a landmark moment for the Assembly. I have seen many Bills passed today that I am incredibly proud of.”
“I thank the Member for that. It is worth noting that, comparatively, this Bill takes a light touch in respect of offences being committed, because the punishment for breaching safe access zones around the world, in almost all cases where they are operational, can result in imprisonment and wildly higher fines than what is being proposed i…”
“I am also aware that the Minister, who, Mr Butler, is your party colleague, has also confirmed that he will produce a policy paper setting out how his Department intends to implement the requirements for safe access zones, including guidance to operators of health and social care premises.”
“None of that is what I have experienced with abortion services. <BR /> <BR />I went out to consultation on the Bill in 2017, just as the Executive was collapsing yet again, and the three-year hiatus meant that I could not progress the Bill any further.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,016 lines we hold for Clare Bailey, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 7 of 21.
“Has the First Minister attended any events or venues where he had to provide any certification? If so, will he tell us about how straightforward and non-discriminatory that process was?”
“For those reasons, on top of a lot of others, the Green Party will not support the motion to grant the Bill accelerated passage.”
“Many issues with the request for accelerated passage have been raised, and the points were well made. I will not labour any of them further. <BR /> <BR />There have been many examples of fiscal mismanagement from the five-party system of governance over the years. Of course, RHI was the most prominent. With that in mind and given the ramifications of the Bill, particularly during an unpredictable global pandemic, we should all be extremely wary of allowing accelerated passage. Time is tight in this mandate, and we have an unprecedented list of legislation to work through. The Minister is bringing an Executive Bill to the House, however, so it needs to be pointed out that it already has scheduling priority over most of the other Bills that we will potentially look at.”
“Minister, how can any of us have any faith in the delivery of the strategy and the direction of travel to get what is expected of it?”
“That is a man who has worked with regulatory agencies across the world, in Ecuador, Columbia, Madagascar, Indonesia, but has:”
“I expect that many Members saw the recent BBC 'Spotlight' programme on the ongoing devastation caused by gold-mining in the Sperrin mountains. I think that I quote Professor Steven Emerman, who claimed:”
“How are rent rates set in public bodies? When we talk about "affordable housing", what do we mean? I am not aware of any public or private rental rates that are set using an average income rate. How bizarre is that? As far as I am aware, all rents are set in accordance with the market value. Well, the market value is unaffordable and unsustainable, and using that as a measure for something that is a human right needs to stop. Human rights should never be a commodity, but that is exactly what is happening, and it is happening under our watch.”
“While the Minister is here, I take the opportunity to let her know that I have received the written notification from my housing provider. It is good news that the notifications are going out. Hopefully, that measure will go some way to stemming the loss of public housing into private ownership. It is bizarre that we spend public money building public housing that we sell off at a lower value into private ownership, and there is no requirement for the public stock to be replaced: that needs to stop.”
“For example, the private rental market in the UK was regulated for most of the last century, the last regulations having been abolished in 1989. Paris caps rents so that they cannot be 20% more than an area's average. In February 2020, Berlin introduced a five-year rent cap for all apartments built prior to 2014. <BR /> <BR />I am aware that the rent-to-buy scheme will be ended next August.”
“It is sometimes hard to blame people for going for that model, but housing is a human right, not an economic lever. Let us understand that and wake up to the encroachment that we are allowing to happen and that is putting so many people at risk. <BR /> <BR />Knowing that, the Green Party supports rent control measures. For those who are unaware, rent controls are government regulations that limit the rent that a landlord can charge. Policies can come in different forms, and regulations might include capping annual rent increases so that they do not increase beyond a given figure, preventing landlords from increasing rent during a tenancy, and creating a rent ceiling or upper limit that specifies the maximum rent for a property to let. Rent controls are not a new phenomenon.”
“<BR /> <BR />I do not believe that everyone should want to own their own home. I am a renter; I am a social housing tenant. I was one of the A1 priorities that were mentioned. I was at the top of the list. I was resettled absolutely fine, but it was a lengthy, bruising and torturous process. <BR /> <BR />Our long-established communities who already face the chronic shortage of housing will be further impacted when landlords realise that they can make a heftier profit if they rent to students or young professionals rather than people from within those communities. Market forces mean that private rental is sold as a great boost to people to help with their pension incomes. It is a wee bit brutal when pensions are under attack and are dwindling.”
“I support the motion, but I also put on record the fact that housing has not been an issue only for nationalists and unionists; it has been an issue for all of us. Mr Nesbitt quite rightly points out the flexibilities that having a second bedroom can give, but we also need to be cognisant that the welfare reform legislation that went through, supported by many in the House, removed that flexibility from a lot of people. <BR /> <BR />I will not go over points that have been made. I urge the Executive to commit to developing legislation for a Northern Ireland-specific rent control scheme. We cannot continue to run the risk of becoming like Dublin or London, where increasing numbers of people are priced out of the city and long-established working-class community areas become gentrified.”
“<BR /> <BR />In summing up, I thank every Member, even those who are not supportive of the Bill, for acknowledging the deliberate campaign of harassment and intimidation that is being allowed to continue on our streets. It is heartening that that has been acknowledged. I thank Sinn Féin, SDLP, UUP, the Alliance Party, People Before Profit, Claire Sugden and Trevor Lunn — I know that he did not participate in the debate, but he has sent support for the Bill — for all their support at this stage. I thank the Health Committee for agreeing to receive the Bill for scrutiny, if passed. I look forward to working with the Committee through the process, if the Bill progresses to that stage. I commend the Bill.”
“We are the Northern Ireland Assembly, and the Assembly is tasked with creating Northern Ireland-specific legislation. That is what the Bill is. <BR /> <BR />I also acknowledge Liz Kimmins's contribution. She rightly thanked her constituents for coming together and, in direct response to the ongoing protests on their streets, forming themselves into the Supporting Women Newry group. However, they should not have to do that. We need to be cognisant of that level of response and any unintended consequences that come from it. We are tasked with creating solutions, rather than creating none and allowing people to come up with their own.”
“Another issue that was raised related to Sajid Javid and the UK Home Office reporting. It claimed that, in its opinion, no national zones were needed or would be implemented. Of course, we are not in the same place as England, Scotland or Wales on the issue. I am not aware that Mr Javid or the Home Office paid any consideration to the women in Northern Ireland when reporting that there was no need for national zones. CEDAW has, and, in its UK inquiry, it identified the difference between Northern Ireland and GB and recommended safe zones as a solution. When they have been put in place in England, it has been done under the authority and remit of a council. Of course, councils in Northern Ireland have very different powers from those in GB.”
“It would be less effective for a Bill — an Act, if it becomes an Act — to instruct a Department to "maybe" or "perhaps" do something; rather, it is best to remove ambiguity and instruct directly. For that reason, the word used is "must".”
“<BR /> <BR />Concerns were expressed about ambiguity and a lack of clarity in clause 6. Mr Chambers brought clarity to it. In response to Rachel Woods's contribution, he said that, when determining impact, you need to ask the person who has had that unsolicited or unwanted approach, had their access blocked or been recorded going about their work. Ask them how that made them feel. That will clear up any ambiguity. That is what needs to be acted on. <BR /> <BR />I suspect that we could go round the houses on this for a long time. As I said, I am more than happy to receive constructive comment on the issues. If the Bill is passed, I will look forward to the Committee scrutiny and, of course, engage with all concerned, including the PSNI, as I have said. <BR /> <BR />I turn now to clause 8(2). Again, a wording issue was raised.”
“I thank the Member. You will be aware that freedom of assembly is caveated and that the Bill is within the caveats that are set out. It is not an unrestricted right and freedom; there are limitations. The Bill is designed and drafted within those limitations. I think that you know that fine well. <BR /> <BR />There are the competing rights of those seeking access and people's freedom of assembly, but let us not forget that a duty is also placed on the health and social care trusts to protect their staff. That is a huge consideration. Right now, many staff do not feel protected. Health trusts and chief executives are struggling to find a way to do that. The expense of putting extra measures in place is not one that anybody would want to burden an already overstretched health system with.”
“That clause was inserted deliberately. <BR /> <BR />I come back to you, Mr Allister. You are well versed in courtroom settings. You are a practitioner and, I think, a trained QC, so you understand well how the law works. I suspect that you are using the debate to highlight your personal view on abortion and distract from the intent of the Bill. The Bill is about balancing the competing rights of all involved. It is not about discriminating or favouring one or the other; it is about trying to accommodate safe access while allowing the right to protest and assembly.”
“We should also be aware of the impact of comments about baby loss. I found them quite distressing. I remind Members that many women who have suffered baby loss for any reason attend family planning clinics and other healthcare settings. They often report how distressing it is to be confronted with those campaigns at the door. Please be mindful of that, Members. It is a very real fact. <BR /> <BR />Of course, to cover any unintentional criminalisation of any person who is unaware of their behaviour or of the existence of a safe zone, there is clause 6(4) — the defence clause — which states:”
“Thank you for that. That is exactly what I was saying. If the mother attends as the partner of her daughter, she is a protected person, but, if she is not attending with the consent of her daughter, she will be subject to the same restrictions as everyone else in the zone.”
“I thank the Member for that intervention. I hope that I have made it clear that, if the Bill progresses, I am willing to engage at any stage and to bring clarity to areas where, people feel, there is vagueness. Any language used in the Bill can be changed at any time at Consideration Stage and Further Consideration Stage. I have genuinely yet to hear of an example where a mother has been within sight of a clinic door still attempting to dissuade her daughter from going inside for professional help, information, advice or service. If such an example arose, as Miss Woods pointed out, the mother is also a protected person if she is attending as the partner of her daughter.”
“I thank the Member for that. I do not think I said "undue"; I think I said "influencing", influencing either way. If a person wants to access services or enter premises, whether it be for accessing a service that is provided in the building, for work or for any other reason, they should be able to do so. That is where I stand on that point, and that is the essence of the Bill.”
“If that was my intent, the Bill would go much further than a potential 5-metre radius from a clinic or premises door.”
“Maybe I should say "must change", "might change, "should change" or "does change", but, given that this is a debate, it is probably best to test that out with "may change", because words are important. If the Bill passes this stage, I am more than willing to continue engaging. <BR /> <BR />Mr Allister, in particular, has taken umbrage at clause 6, especially clause 6(2)(a), which deals with influencing a person in a safe zone. He used graphic imagery as one example of potential influencing and gave another example of a mother trying to stop her daughter accessing the premises. On that, I reiterate that the point of the Bill is to prevent undue influence on a protected person in a safe zone; it is not to mute any anti-choice point of view or campaign.”
“A few Members also think that clause 6 is too vague. That was brought up a number of times, and it was mainly Mr Buckley, Ms Bradley and Mr Allister who raised concerns. I will continue to listen to those concerns to see whether I can make clause 6 much more effective. If I can, I will be more than happy to have those conversations at any time. If the Bill is passed at this stage, I will continue to work on further scrutiny of the clause. However, all three of those Members have dismissed supporting the Bill at this stage, so I doubt that there is anything that I can say or any clarity that I can provide that may change where they are on that.”
“I thank the Member. It is, of course, anyone's legal right to challenge any legislation, if they want to do so. The Bill does not interfere with that right. I will leave that point; although it is a valid one of which to be cognisant, I have no evidence to show that that will happen.”
“In none of those countries has it led to the roll back of other rights or to other unintended precedents being set.”
“When you understand, however, that the leaflets are filled with misinformation and non-facts; that they are put forcibly into people's bags, pockets or hands; and that they claim all sorts of nonsense such as that abortion will not "un-rape" you or that abortion will give you breast cancer, I hope that giving out leaflets can be seen as a bit more intimidatory, or even sinister, in some cases. I will come back to those points. <BR /> <BR />When people compare that behaviour to the concern about setting a precedent, they need to be directed to other countries that have passed similar measures. Some Members mentioned a few of the places in which we have seen them pass, such as some states in the United States, South Africa, France, Canada and Australia — as I have mentioned — and England, which implemented them via council powers.”
“I hope that the Bill, if passed, would lessen the demand for PSNI resources and enable the police to deal with offending behaviour quickly, efficiently and without heavy sanctions on anyone. <BR /> <BR />Concerns were raised about the Bill's potential to set a precedent by rolling back or restricting other rights and freedoms. The example of giving out leaflets was used. That is an interesting example. Giving out leaflets sounds like a passive, pleasant pastime. For example, we all do it at elections.”
“I have engaged and worked with the police, and I have had answers to freedom of information (FOI) requests from them. I know how much they have done, how many times they have been called and how much resource they have had to put into these situations. From freedom of information requests, I know that, between October 2014 and October 2017, the police had 83 reported incidents relating to the Marie Stopes clinic alone, 17 of which were passed to the Public Prosecution Service. The list goes on. The police also had a permanent presence at the clinic's doors. That is extensive use of resource for the PSNI. The police still go through such processes today; although they might not have a permanent presence at premises, they still receive calls and deal with complaints.”
“I even went to Australia, believe me, and not just in the virtual world that we now live in. I had meetings with the sponsors of the Bill that was passed there. I spoke to cross-party MPs about their views on how that was achieved, and I listened to the tragic circumstance that led to the Bill's being proposed. A security guard was murdered as he was doing his job, and that led to Australia's implementing safe access zones. I will continue, at every stage, to consult, discuss with and talk to as many people as possible, because I want the Bill to be right — rather than vindictive, as Mr Allister claims. <BR /> <BR />Other issues were raised. For example, some believe that the Bill might cause undue stress on PSNI resources. I refute that; in fact, I see the Bill doing the complete opposite.”
“I started to work on this Bill in 2016. The Member may not be not aware, but it is worth noting that there is a personal cost to Members in going to consultation on a private Member's Bill. That cost is not covered by the Assembly, but it was a cost that I was more than happy to pay. If necessary, I will continue to do it and do it again. If it gives any assurance, I have continued and will continue, for the duration of the process, to engage with all bodies, including the Equality Commission, the Human Rights Commission, the PSNI, the health and social care trusts and their staff, women, the Secretary of State and Westminster.”
“It has been greatly heartening to listen to the majority of Members who have spoken, who have obviously understood and engaged with the impact of the anti-abortion protests on women and who have told their personal stories and acknowledged the widespread nature of what we are starting to see. <BR /> <BR />I will focus on issues that were raised. As Claire Sugden mentioned, it is a Second Stage debate, and, if passed today, the Bill will have further stages in which amendments can be made. I would more than welcome having conversations around all comments to see whether we can get reasonable amendments to allay any issues that were raised. <BR /> <BR />I start with Mr Buckley's comments. He was quite critical in pointing out that there had been a lack of consultation since 2016, which was a number of years ago.”
“I consulted widely and met many bodies during the drafting of the Bill, and, to date, no human rights or equality impacts have been raised; in fact, the Equality Commission has welcomed the Bill as providing further clarity and sees the opportunity for the Bill to have a positive equality impact, which is worth noting. <BR /> <BR />The Northern Ireland Office (NIO) did not move to introduce safe access zones or any other measures when it changed the abortion laws via Westminster back in October 2019. It said that it would keep an eye on the ongoing situation. I have met the Secretary of State on the issue, and he welcomes the move to follow through and finish what was not done back then. I urge the House to please step up and support the Bill.”
“Among the specific articles of the convention that were found to have been violated were articles 10 and 12, as there had been a failure to protect from harassment by anti-abortion protestors women who were seeking sexual and reproductive healthcare services and information.”
“Staff also have the right to do their job without being abused or harassed. We would not accept that in any other circumstance. We would not accept it outside blood donation centres, so it should not be acceptable in this context. <BR /> <BR />The 2018 'Report of the inquiry concerning the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland under article 8 of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women' concluded that there had been:”
“<BR /> <BR />Clause 10 deals with monitoring. It requires the Department to publish annual reports on the effectiveness of safe access zones for protecting the safety and dignity of protected persons. <BR /> <BR />Clause 11 provides a brief interpretation, while clause 12 deals with commencement and provides that clauses 6 and 7 will come into effect three months after Royal Assent, if the Bill is enacted. Everything else would come into effect on the day after Royal Assent. Clause 13 is simply the Bill's short title. <BR /> <BR />Members, as I said, I feel that the Bill achieves a balance. If I could add anything else, it would be to reiterate the point that all people — every single citizen — have the right to access healthcare in confidence, without fear and without being intimidated.”
“The Department must consult with operators, surrounding landowners and occupiers, the PSNI and other appropriate people to determine the extent of the safe zone. The Department can vary a safe zone after consultation or remove it if the operator no longer wishes for it to be there. It must also publish the extent of the safe access zone and any variations or revocations that it thinks appropriate. <BR /> <BR />Clause 9 deals with the exercise of functions. The Department must have regard to the safety and dignity of protected persons, their right to a private and family life under article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and their right to manifest religious belief, their right to freedom of assembly, their right to freedom of expression and their right to protest, as I mentioned, under articles 9 to 11.”
“<BR /> <BR />I turn to clause 7, which deals with the enforcement provisions. Those allow the PSNI to direct a person to leave or to remove a person from a safe access zone if it believes or thinks that the person is about to create an offence under clause 6(2) of the Bill. The police can direct people to cease recording under clause 6(3) and may use reasonable force to remove them, if necessary. Clause 7 also makes it an offence not to comply with removal or to resist it. That is punishable, on summary conviction, by a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale. <BR /> <BR />Clause 8 sets out the procedure for designating a safe access zone. It stipulates that operators of premises notify the Department of Health that they wish to have a safe access zone. The Department of Health will then have eight weeks in which to create one.”
“I thank the Member for that. Again, I go back to the situation of someone who is trying to access healthcare and is fearful about doing so, or prevented or intimated from doing so. They are not reporting to the police. They are leaving the area and not accessing the healthcare. The Bill is about creating safe zones for people to access healthcare so that they do not necessarily have to make a report to the police and go through that whole process. It is about accessing healthcare services that are provided in a number of places throughout Northern Ireland. It is nobody else's business what healthcare people need access to, so the view that women who should be able to access that healthcare confidentially should be expected to report incidents to the police and go through that process is completely untenable.”
“I thank the Member for her intervention. She is absolutely right. Using the harassment Order and reporting to the police take time, and, when people are trying to access healthcare, counselling or advice in emergency circumstances, it is not plausible to go down that avenue.”
“I thank the Member for that. From my experience, I feel that this is needed for specific reasons, which, I hope, I have set out. We are seeing the escalation of targeted campaigns against women on the streets of Northern Ireland. That is why I have brought the Bill.”
“I thank the Member, again, for his intervention. I go back to the fact that I do not believe that current law is able to tackle what is happening. On one occasion when I was assaulted, the assault was reported to the police. The person was arrested and investigated and, after six weeks of a restraining order and having a zone put on them, it was deemed that no further action could be taken because sufficient CCTV evidence could not be collected. Therefore that person was allowed to continue with the behaviour. Having listened to the police in my discussions with them over the years, I feel that the current harassment Order is not enough to allow people confidentiality and safe access to premises.”
“Under current harassment laws, we have to have the one person targeting the same person on two or more occasions, and that person then reporting it to the police. In my experience, anybody who is accessing particular services will not report harassment to the police because they want to maintain their confidentiality, and the police struggle to enforce current harassment laws. We had another circumstance in which a member of staff from Informing Choices, formerly the Family Planning Association, was assaulted. The conviction was upheld, yet the person who assaulted the staff member is still allowed to protest at the doors, and the police feel that they cannot take action.”
“I thank the Member for the intervention. In my experience, the current harassment laws simply do not suffice.”
“Clause 5 looks at the safe access zone. That extends to the premises, including all entrances and exits, and the public area outside and in the immediate vicinity, as designated by the Department of Health. That is designed to allow protected people to carry out their duties or access services safely without fear or intimidation and with the assurance of confidentiality. <BR /> <BR />Clause 6 goes into the offences. It makes it an offence in the safe access zone to influence a protected person or prevent or impede their access, or cause them harassment, alarm or distress. It stipulates that recording a protected person without their consent for the same purpose is also an offence. In addition, it creates a defence if a person:”
“That includes such premises within the definition of protected premises under the condition that the premises is a hospital or health and social care trust clinic that is used to provide medical services under the Health and Personal Social Services (NI) Order 1972 or is approved by the Department of Health for the purposes of the clause. Premises that provide information, advice or counselling on abortion are also deemed to be protected premises, as are premises whose operator requests them to be and which the Department of Health determines them to be. The Department of Health can make that determination only if it is reasonable to do so. <BR /> <BR />Clause 4 looks at protected persons. It stipulates that a "protected person" is anyone:”
“It criminalises acts within the zones that prevent or impede access, or which influence, harass, alarm or distress those accessing the premises. Clause 2 stipulates the premises where abortions are carried out and sets the definition of protected premises as any premises where terminations are, or are proposed to be, legally carried out. Clause 3 is about:”
“The Bill achieves that balance. <BR /> <BR />I will give a brief overview of the Bill's clauses. I hope that Members have had time to read them. Clause 1 simply sets out the overview. The clause:”