Paula Bradshaw
South Belfast · Alliance Party · Northern Ireland
“They were places where those who were vulnerable were concealed, young mothers were stripped of their babies and children were stripped of their identities. Let us be resolute in our remembrance of what happened behind the doors of those institutions.”
“At all stages, the Committee has set out its clear support for the legislation's overarching aims and principles, which are to establish a statutory public inquiry into the systemic failings associated with mother-and-baby institutions, Magdalene laundries and workhouses between 1922 and 1995 and to create a statutory redress scheme for t…”
“Again, I refuse to call them "mother-and-baby homes", for we now know that there was nothing homely about them. What the Bill can and must do is offer a tangible declaration that the state accepts its responsibility.”
“As Chairperson of the Committee for the Executive Office, I welcome the opportunity to speak at the Final Stage of the Inquiry (Mother and Baby Institutions, Magdalene Laundries and Workhouses) and Redress Scheme Bill.”
“Key points were also made in relation to redress: the need to ensure that the Executive Office introduces clear guidelines for the scheme as soon as practicable; the need for the Executive Office to widely communicate and promote the scheme to all victims and survivors, including those who live overseas; and the need for the Executive Off…”
“The First Minister and deputy First Minister tabled a number of amendments that gave effect to the Committee's intent across a number of clauses. In several instances, the Committee chose to withdraw its amendments in favour of the Ministers' wording, where that better reflected the broader book of the law.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,444 lines we hold for Paula Bradshaw, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 49.
“I put on record that I will be supporting all the amendments.”
“<BR /> <BR />Amendment Nos 4 and 5 are redrafted amendments that better align language with other Parts of the Bill. Amendment No 6 is a redrafted amendment that seeks to ensure that any implications arising under GDPR, as well as any potential impact on court proceedings, are properly considered and addressed. Amendment Nos 7 and 8 are redrafted amendments that will ensure consistency of language and approach throughout the Bill. That concludes my remarks on the group 1 amendments in my capacity as Committee Chair. <BR /> <BR />I will now make a few brief remarks as an Alliance Party MLA. I thank the departmental officials for their engagement with the Committee over the past number of weeks on the tidying-up amendments. It has been very useful to understand what has gone on behind the scenes.”
“I will speak to the amendments in group 1 on behalf of the Committee for the Executive Office at Further Consideration Stage of the Inquiry (Mother and Baby Institutions, Magdalene Laundries and Workhouses) and Redress Scheme Bill. I welcome victims and survivors and their family members to Parliament Buildings today, and I put on record the Committee's thanks to everyone who gave evidence and for their continued engagement throughout the process. <BR /> <BR />The Department's first three technical amendments in group 1 relate to clauses 8 and 10. The Committee appreciates that the changes are technical in nature and are intended to ensure consistency of drafting with other provisions in the Bill, particularly on consultation requirements that apply to members of the inquiry panel.”
“First Minister, the refugee integration strategy is now over a year old. When will we see the first annual report? The strategy says that there is the ability to change direction and emphasis based on emerging issues. Can you please outline how the strategy will change in the months ahead to deal with the violence that we have just seen on our streets?”
“If we make legislative change in the Chamber, there is a statutory duty on the relevant Department to deliver on the elements that pertain under its vires. We have an Education Minister from the DUP at this time, but next time it might be Sinn Féin, the Ulster Unionist Party etc. Departments are not wee fiefdoms for a particular political party's Minister; they deliver statutory services for all the people of Northern Ireland, not just the people who support the DUP, for example.”
“OK. <BR /> <BR />Other political parties have not prioritised it. The Executive were never going to have duplicate manifesto pledges about stuff that they were going to work on. They can take forward only the things on which they have common agreement. Should we let those young people down and not try to advance policies and legislative change in the Chamber just because other members of the Executive are not on board with our policy pursuits?”
“I thank the Member for letting me in. I want to address that point. We came into this mandate with our election manifesto. As Mr Gaston pointed out, this was one of the policy areas that we wanted to work on.”
“When those young boys got somebody like Graham, who is a saint and like a big father figure in their lives, they did not need to go through the youth justice system or the criminal justice system. They needed proper, timely intervention. Were it not for such organisations, we would see a lot more disengaged young people who would then go on to a life of crime.”
“I thank the Member for giving way, and I hope that he will indulge me for a minute. <BR /> <BR />Before I came into full-time politics, I ran a project in the Village area of South Belfast for disengaged young people. The Youth Justice Agency would come to us and ask, "Could you take such-and-such?" I would ask Graham — a lot of you will know Graham from TREE — about their backstory. Every one of them had a backstory: father in prison, mother had died etc etc. They all had a backstory. Had they received better intervention in the education system and not dropped out of school or received better social security support at a younger age, it could have been different, and you have made that argument.”
“Mr Gaston, I was not sneering. You were sneering at the Alliance Party and at the procedures in the Chamber, and I was simply correcting you.”
“Thank you. I stood up at the same time as Sian. <BR /> <BR />On the Justice Bill, I appreciate that you have been co-opted only in the past couple of years, but, in every mandate — the Justice Minister can come in if she wants — there will be a miscellaneous provisions Bill in which a lot of tidying up and progressions will come forward. I know that you have not been here for a long time, Mr Gaston, but it is not unusual for that to happen in each mandate.”
“Excuse me. I have not finished. <BR /> <BR />There has been enough exchange on the matter. We have spent many days discussing the amendments to the Justice Bill. We, in the Alliance Party, want to move on and make progress. We are going round in circles on that issue.”
“On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. When my party colleague Nuala McAllister was speaking earlier, the Speaker told her that she was not to discuss the petition of concern at length, yet we have just had several minutes of —.”
“Thank you, Minister, for your answer. My office is on the Ormeau Road, which I walked up last week just after the disturbances and riots. The only businesses that were shut were the businesses, restaurants and cafes that are run by ethnic minority communities. Obviously, they lost out on income, which they can ill afford. The staff also lost out on tips, wages and stuff. It was really disappointing that they did not feel that it was safe enough to open. There was obviously an information vacuum, because other restaurants and cafes etc were open; other businesses felt safe enough. What plans can you put in place so that, if there is any such eventuality in the future, there is better communication with those business owners so that they do not lose out on the income that their businesses deserve?”
“<BR /> <BR />Further to that, following on from the leader of the Opposition's contribution, while it is great that so many agencies slotted into place over the past few days, what will you do about long-term emergency planning for when that situation arises again, so that people know where to go for help?”
“Mr Speaker, I apologise that I was not here for the start of the statement. <BR /> <BR />First Minister, very recently, Members attended the North/South Inter-Parliamentary Association (NSIPA) plenary in Dublin. It was a wonderful opportunity for us to hear about some of the really good projects that are coming forward through the PEACE PLUS programme. What role will the North/South Ministerial Council have in shaping the next round of funding with a view to our consideration of PEACE PLUS through the prism of full cultural and ethnic diversity as opposed to the binary green/orange of the past?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. As he knows, my party colleague Sian Mulholland spoke for nearly two hours. For a good percentage of that time, he was not in the Chamber, so how can he possibly state that she had not done her research or looked into every crevice of the amendment?”
“On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. We have had a robust debate. We have heard from parties on all sides of the House through interventions and contributions. Standing Order 25 is on "Closure of Debate". I ask that the Question now be put to a vote. Thank you.”
“Thank you for your response, Minister. You will be aware of Belfast City Council's recent consultation on the use of the mechanism to extend opening hours over 13 Sundays this summer. In response to the consultation, 79% of people were in favour, as were 57% of businesses, and retail workers were evenly split. Can you not ask your officials to look at that response? There is clear support across the community for the change.”
“— area, where those addresses are. I then spoke to the PSNI on Friday —.”
“As it stands, there is a statutory requirement to publish a full, unrestricted public register of HMO addresses, including the names of managers, but that was exploited last week by racist agitators and used as a tool of intimidation. We therefore need to address the imbalance between data transparency and the right to a private life. <BR /> <BR />I will address one issue that Gerry Carroll raised. Not to be contrary, but when I spoke to the PSNI on Wednesday afternoon, it had deployed 18 police officers just to the Holylands and lower Lisburn Road —”
“<BR /> <BR />I also condemn the reckless and malicious targeting of vulnerable people through the online posting of addresses of houses in multiple occupation. It was nothing short of a digital hit list, painting a target on the back of not just migrant workers and people from ethnic minority communities but students and short-term renters. It was not just those from ethnic minority communities who feared that they would be attacked in their home. <BR /> <BR />The weaponisation of data highlights a critical vulnerability, and I thank Belfast City Council for taking down the list. I have written to the Minister for Communities to ask him urgently to review and amend section 62 of the Houses in Multiple Occupation Act (Northern Ireland) 2016.”
“<BR /> <BR />Over the past week, we have seen the worst and the best of people here. I place on record my thanks to the Ormeau community and Cooke Centenary Presbyterian Church for their amazing donation drive over the weekend and thank everybody who donated. I also thank organisations such as Anaka Women's Collective for the subsequent dispersal of essential food and toiletries to people living in our city who are cowering in fear. I was at the donation centre yesterday morning, and I heard about the immense pressures, such as the need for formula milk. I saw volunteers go out and buy it out of their own pocket so that terrified new mothers who are staying in their homes can get that essential nutrition for their precious babies. How horrendous.”
“Last week, we saw scenes on the streets of Belfast and beyond that do not represent who we are or who we should aspire to be. The racist riots that tore through our streets were not just an attack on bricks and mortar but a direct assault on the safety, dignity and belonging of our ethnic minority neighbours. I send my very best wishes to all those people who were displaced over the past week and to the people who were attacked on Donegall Avenue in the early hours of Sunday morning. It is absolutely deplorable that anyone's right to a family life and to privacy would be so grotesquely breached. <BR /> <BR />We in the Alliance Party are clear that Belfast must be a shared city for everyone, but, right now, for many people, including our healthcare workers, students, business owners and children, that is simply not happening.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. The issue has been raised with me by my constituents when I have knocked on their doors. Will the Member concur that Guide Dogs UK will support the amendment because it is not just a problem for those who are able-bodied, but they are a particular concern for people with visual problems?”
“We in the Committee for the Executive Office have received a lot of correspondence about the assessment of funding into the next financial year. In the arena of mental health support, what conversations have you had with the Health Minister to see whether the public service could pick up some of the weight in that regard?”
“We hope to see the results from the consultation process on its latest strategic framework, which ended last Wednesday, being transformed into concrete and robust actions to stamp out naked intolerance and racism. Likewise, it is important that we see the Executive Office bring a revised race relations order to the Chamber without further delay and hopefully before the summer recess so that we can ensure that there are adequate protections against discrimination and disadvantage for everyone in this place.”
“The former Presbyterian church on Donegall Pass in my constituency was set on fire on two occasions during refurbishment works by the Belfast Multicultural Association in January 2021 and April 2022. That came off the back of an orchestrated attack through misinformation in that community — that appears to be the case with the Shankill Road fire as well — despite the important work that the association was carrying out to support people from all backgrounds across South Belfast and beyond during the pandemic. In that case, the public were rightly outraged, and I am pleased to see the same response in this case in the Shankill. <BR /> <BR />We need a robust response by the Executive Office. It has responsibilities through the racial equality strategy and that directorate.”
“I thank Dr Singhal, who is chair of the Indian community centre. He has shown real leadership and practical support in recent days. We should follow his example. <BR /> <BR />We all know people living on the Shankill Road who seek to bring up their families in peace and with respect for others. Those who carried out the attack did not do so in their name, and they should be thoroughly ashamed of their actions. There have been decades of amazing efforts by a range of community-based organisations to regenerate the Shankill Road and address issues of deprivation and disadvantage. That crime runs totally contrary to those efforts. <BR /> <BR />We have seen the pattern before.”
“Like others, I strongly condemn the deliberate attack on the former gospel hall on the Shankill Road on Saturday morning. I thank Gerry Carroll for tabling the Matter of the Day. <BR /> <BR />It was clear that the building, which was no longer in use, was being brought back into use by a man who was refurbishing it, planning to create much-needed jobs and seeking to do something positive for the Shankill Road community. The PSNI has called the attack a racially motivated hate crime, and that fills me with such despair. I am disappointed that that man's ambitions have been dashed by such an act of cowardice and intolerance. Those responsible were trying to intimidate that businessman and those who were supporting the establishment of his business, and we cannot let them win. We must all stand in solidarity with him in the Chamber.”
“Thank you for your response, Minister. I am a little concerned, because the houses that I referred to are not just anticipated but are being built and occupied. There was some talk about a new school in the mid-Down area. Is your Department actively involved in pushing for a new build for the people of that area?”
“Minister, you will be aware of the disparity in access to support services for children with special educational needs that exists for non-statutory preschool settings? How will you ensure that no child misses out on access to the right support?”
“On a point of order, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. As someone who is bringing forward a private Member's Bill, it is my understanding that John has followed every part of the Standing Orders and the procedures outlined by the Speaker's Office in support of the recommendations of the Bill Office at every stage. Members from all sides of the House will introduce private Members' Bills over the next few months. It is incredibly disingenuous and discourteous for so many DUP MLAs today to try to undermine the efforts that Mr Blair has made to take the Bill forward. I ask you to refer the matter to the Speaker's Office, in order to ensure that the record reflects the fact that John has followed every single stage required of him to bring forward this private Member's Bill.”
“Can you update the House on the plans to redevelop the former school of music in Donegall Pass? I want to pick up on a phrase that you used: "capacity building". Is any financial support going to the programme sponsors to ensure that they get the right mix in that building?”
“She has been a really valuable link between the Committee and victims and survivors. Finally, I thank the Committee team, which has been superb, the Bill Office team and also, of course, the Executive Office officials, who have supported us during the Bill's progress.”
“Therefore, whilst I recognise that there is a time and place for legal support in the process, we will support the amendment on the basis that the delegated legislation that comes forward will include a preference for applicants to receive support through the community and voluntary sector as opposed to through the legal profession, because we think that that would be a far more trauma-informed approach. <BR /> <BR />This is the last time that I will speak in the debate, so I thank the victims and survivors who came here today. I thank the voluntary and community sector for its support, including WAVE, and I also want to put on record my thanks to Marie Breen Smyth, who is the current chair of the Victims and Survivors Consultation Forum. She has been superb and has been a breath of fresh air since she took up that post.”
“Junior Minister, the Executive Office Committee has the benefit of hearing evidence from the likes of those who are involved in the Troubles permanent disablement payment scheme and, previously, those involved in the historical institutional abuse redress scheme. It is my observation that, when applicants were provided with support by the voluntary sector, as in the case of the VSS, the applications were far more robust, far more timely and more complete and had a higher prospect of getting through. I intend no disrespect to those in the legal profession, but some of the applications through that route were seriously delayed, incomplete and caused unnecessary delays.”
“I do not intend to speak for long on this group of amendments. As a party, we will support all of them, but I want to make some remarks about amendment No 39, which is to clause 39 and states:”
“I thank the junior Minister for giving way. Does she acknowledge the despair and harm that were caused when members of the consultative forum were first presented with the Bill and that date of 29 September 2011? You have had months to go back to that consultative forum and present an alternative date, which could even be 1995. Why have you not taken that opportunity? We would not be in the position that we are in today, with people experiencing pain and suffering because that amendment was not selected. Why did you not take the opportunity to go back to the forum to which you provide secretariat support?”
“On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. Further to your interjection during Mr Gaston's contribution, and given the huge sensitivity around the refusal by the Speaker to accept the Committee amendment, I ask that you convey to the Speaker the fact that we would appreciate some transparency in relation to his decision not to approve the amendment to remove the posthumous date. Thank you.”
“<BR /> <BR />That is everything at this stage.”
“I am upset that there were children who are now adults who were in those homes and suffered harm and abuse, but I feel that the amendment would take the Bill way beyond its scope and could unintentionally open it up to wider applications. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 46 to schedule 3 would insert the words "the mother of the deceased". Again, I am very sympathetic to that amendment. I am, by no means, an expert on the law of intestacy or on the European Convention on Human Rights, and I would certainly take counsel from the junior Minister in her warning about the particular circumstances here and unintended consequences. While I am again sympathetic to the fact that birth mothers are not eligible for a posthumous payment for their deceased child, we will oppose the amendment but only on the grounds of its potential unintended consequences.”
“<BR /> <BR />We welcome the First Minister and the deputy First Minister's amendment No 34 to clause 32, which will change the process from one that is subject to negative resolution to one that is subject to approval by a resolution of the Assembly. As elected representatives, we should be involved in scrutinising all the delegated legislation and regulations that flow from the Bill. <BR /> <BR />The junior Minister set out clearly why Gerry Carroll's amendment No 45 to schedule 2 would be problematic, as it would have unintended consequences and move the Bill well beyond its scope of supporting the women and their children who endured the harsh conditions of mother-and-baby institutions.”
“We have to acknowledge the age profile of a lot of victims and survivors, who are depending on the legislation to reflect their needs. <BR /> <BR />Associated with that, Sinéad McLaughlin's amendment is an attempt to factor an inflationary increase into the standardised payment of £10,000. We will support that amendment. I fully agree with it. Not to go back a step, but I thought that, were we to find an amendment that would unify us all, it would have been one that removed the posthumous date, but we are not allowed to debate or vote on such an amendment today, so we will support Sinéad's amendment.”
“I certainly appreciate that. I put on record another element of the evidence that we received, which is that many people, especially the birth mothers, have concerns that, although they have been campaigning for 10, 12 or 14 years, we are only now getting to the stage at which we are debating the legislation for the inquiry. They have serious concerns about how long it will take to set up the inquiry and for it to conduct its business and compile a report, with an individually assessed payment process coming at the far end. There are people in the Gallery today whom the Committee has heard from who are in their mid-to-late 70s. They have said they hope to be but fear that they will not still be on this earth by the time that the individually assessed redress payment scheme is in place.”
“I very much accept some of what the junior Minister said about creating a hierarchy, but that is not our intention. We recognise the pain and suffering and the harm, stigma and abuse that everybody involved in that sorry part of our history endured, but there are particular circumstances involved. We know that a very small number of people were affected. If the amendment is to acknowledge admission half a generation or a generation apart, those persons should be eligible.”
“The Executive Office and the Office of the Legislative Counsel (OLC), however, have the capability to look at how secondary legislation could be drafted to ensure that clause 31 could be changed to reflect the situation in which someone who was born in an institution, having later become pregnant, found herself, as result of an unfortunate episode, in an institution again. We will therefore support that amendment.”
“Amendment No 30 relates to the insertion of the words "more than", rather than just "for", when it comes to cases where an individual should be eligible for more than one payment. I very much acknowledge what the junior Minister said about the potential for people having moved from one institution to another.”
“However, the amendment was not selected, and, while I absolutely recognise and respect that the selection of amendments is a matter for the judgement of the Speaker, it would have been more appropriate if we had been able to debate it in detail. I have no doubt that the Committee will return to the issue tomorrow, because it was the number-one issue that came before us, whether through written evidence, oral statements or conversations at the round-table meetings. I fully acknowledge the hurt that was caused by the inclusion of that posthumous eligibility date in the first place and that has been caused again by the fact that we have not been given the opportunity to discuss its removal. <BR /> <BR />I will now focus on the amendments in group 2.”
“Thank you. The amendments in group 2 specifically relate to: "Truth Recovery Redress Service: Entitlement to payment and amount to be paid". As I said, amendment Nos 26 and 27 will not be moved. <BR /> <BR />With your indulgence, Mr Deputy Speaker, I want to refer to an amendment that the Committee proposed that related to the removal of the posthumous eligibility date of 29 September 2011. Notwithstanding the debate about which amendments were or were not selected and the fact that many of us would have liked to have seen that matter debated in the House, the Committee amendment would have broadened eligibility to a range of victims and survivors.”