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 25 of 49.
“Thus far, the balance has been too much on the medical profession, without any demand for transparency from manufacturers and providers of healthcare products. I welcome the inclusion under products of so-called borderline substances such as dermatological or nutritional products. Payments made to companies both for specific products or where there is no relation to the specific product will have to be made publicly available. Currently, there are some voluntary requirements around that, but I think that everyone would agree, following 'First Do No Harm', that that needs to be mandatory. Consent is also required on an ongoing basis, as is the case in the other legislative consent motions that have been debated today. I welcome that upgrading from consultation.”
“This appears to be a relatively minor motion, but it touches on the highly important and urgent issues raised in the Cumberlege review. I recall supporting many of those who met the review panel when it visited Northern Ireland just over three years ago. I have noted the Minister's statement. I hope that we hear more about the implementation of 'First Do No Harm' from him and his departmental officials going forward. The motion touches on only a small aspect of it, but it is an important step nonetheless. <BR /> <BR />The pandemic has brought into even sharper focus the need for accountability in the relationship between pharmaceutical companies in the broadest sense and public health services.”
“I also support the motion. I will not repeat what the Chair of the Committee said, but, going forward with this LCM, the issues of consultation, transparency and accountability will be so important.”
“<BR /> <BR />Two years ago, pre COVID, on International Women's Day, I attended some training in Windsor Women's Centre, and we talked about female genital mutilation and how childcare workers and front-line workers are being trained to spot the signs as they gain the trust of women from different ethnic minority groups coming to the centre. Does the Health Minister propose to extend the communication around the legislative change to people who work with women who come to this country who may be put under pressure to have that testing performed on them? I support the legislative consent motion.”
“I support the legislative consent motion. I am absolutely appalled, as was everyone on the Health Committee, that we are even considering and debating it, but, sadly, there is evidence from the World Health Organization that it occurs here, which reinforces why the ban is necessary. <BR /> <BR />Following the Committee's discussion on the issue, I am slightly concerned that enforcement is simply being left as a matter for the police. I note that the GMC is supportive of the ban and will amend its guidance, but it is important for all healthcare professionals to be aware of the legislative changes.”
“It will make a significant difference to people's lives and make people safer. That is what we are all here for.”
“<BR /> <BR />A further important aspect of the Bill is that victims will have automatic eligibility for special measures assistance, again as part of a package of legislation that will rebalance the justice system so that it recognises the sensitivities involved in such cases and adequately protects victims. The Bill also creates stalking protection orders, which are an essential prevention tool in the first place. <BR /> <BR />I thank the Suzy Lamplugh Trust, alongside organisations such as Women's Aid and Victim Support NI, for keeping the issue in the public eye. They have been clear that the fundamental objective is not to put lots of people in prison for stalking but rather to stop stalking from happening in the first place. <BR /> <BR />I welcome this further extremely important legislation from the Justice Minister.”
“The Bill's Final Stage comes on the day after the laws on coercive control came into force. That serves to re-emphasise just how important the Bill is as part of a package of legislation brought forward by the Justice Minister, particularly in the context of reported crimes of harassment rising so rapidly. <BR /> <BR />As the Justice Minister reminded us earlier, stalking can be both psychologically and physically damaging to victims, given the extreme lengths to which often-delusional offenders go. That is why it is so vital that we create a specific offence whereby repeated or even fixated behaviour, or a single incident of threatening or abusive behaviour, becomes an offence in law.”
“I am extremely grateful for all the support that he gave to me while I was working at the Greater Village Regeneration Trust. <BR /> <BR />The Chamber will never be the same. Christopher brought life and wit to it during lengthy debates. He was always up for an intervention, and his contributions were always heartfelt and well-researched. He was born for politics, and this place will be all the poorer for his sad passing. <BR /> <BR />In closing, I join others in sending my sincerest condolences to Laura, their four children and his wider family circle, his friends, his Church community and his DUP colleagues. I cannot begin to imagine their grief and pain as they come to terms with their loss.”
“Despite being there to represent a different party, Christopher was always courteous, charming and, above all, respectful. Christopher's office and mine also worked together on a number of large campaigns over the years on planning applications, for example. Again, that joint working was always done on the basis of how best to represent our constituents. <BR /> <BR />At this point, I join Mr Allister in extending my condolences to Christopher's staff members, particularly Councillor Tracy Kelly. They always attended community events together and were a formidable team. The community and voluntary sector groups across South Belfast will also be greatly saddened by his passing. He took a really keen interest in local affairs and provided support where he could.”
“Today is indeed a very sad day for the Assembly. I do not think that any of us can quite believe that Christopher will no longer be joining us. <BR /> <BR />I met Christopher on a wet morning in 2005 at a polling station in Donegall Pass. He was only 22 at the time and was running for council. As we chatted away the hours, he greatly impressed me with his precocious understanding of our political system, and I knew then that he was destined for a great political career. Little did I or any one of us in the Chamber today who watched his journey through the council chamber in Belfast to the position of Principal Deputy Speaker know how tragically it would be cut short. <BR /> <BR />Both representing South Belfast, our paths crossed very regularly, not least on hustings panels in the run-up to elections.”
“I am happy to support that, and I again record my support for the Bill sponsor in bringing forward this important Bill.”
“I think that you spoke for longer than I did.”
“I will keep my comments very brief, but that is no reflection of my support for the Bill. Pam Cameron has done an amazing job on behalf of the all-party group on autism in bringing the Bill to this stage. <BR /> <BR />I will not repeat what is in the Bill — that is on the record — but I will just say that my party will support all seven amendments. I thank Autism NI, the National Autistic Society, all the other contributors, the Health Committee and everyone here tonight.”
“<BR /> <BR />I am sympathetic to those who are seeking slavery and trafficking risk orders. Those orders were raised at the UK level in recent months in the review of the Modern Slavery Act 2015. It is useful to add the requirement to consult on them to this Bill, as it enhances what the Bill aims to do. I support amendment No 17 as a means to do that. <BR /> <BR />In closing, on the basis of today's debate, we still have a lot of work to do, and further work may be needed on some of the amendments. However, I urge rapid progress on the Bill, as it reflects an area of high sensitivity where Northern Ireland is being left behind.”
“I appreciate your intervention. <BR /> <BR />I am particularly concerned about amendment No 14, as it means that support will not be provided on the basis of need but on the basis of a blanket time provision. That is not the sort of targeting of resources that we should seek. Likewise, amendment No 15 does not add anything to existing provisions. It is odd that that amendment has been brought forward by a single party rather than being raised at Committee. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 16 is a more specific and clearly beneficial change to include class A drugs in the statutory defence for trafficking and exploitation offences. That will bring Northern Ireland into line with the rest of the UK, which is to be welcomed, and is a clear and useful addition to the Bill.”
“I rise briefly to support amendment Nos 16 and 17. I will, however, oppose amendment Nos 14 and 15, which run contrary to the amendments agreed by the Committee as a whole. Although I will not seek to divide the House on them, I am unconvinced by amendment Nos 12 and 13. I am also concerned about resource implications, which have not been properly consulted on. There also appears to be a lack of cross-community consensus on those amendments, as amendment No 14 in particular contravenes and conflicts with amendment No 12. That speaks of a lack of clarity about what is being sought and about the purpose of such amendments. <BR /> <BR />I am particularly concerned —.”
“Amendment No 9 would maintain that suffering and that silence. Amendment No 10 will move us in the right direction, away from that and towards a more just system.”
“The Gillen review refers to the intense scrutiny faced by those participating in trials and emphasises that, while that is an inevitable consequence of open justice, open justice is not an absolute concept. <BR /> <BR />Scotland, Ireland, New Zealand and parts of Australia have already recognised that it is long past the time for some balance and have given victims much more faith in the system and in how they will be treated if they take a case forward. In Northern Ireland, that is reinforced by what is referred to in the review as the high risk of "public familiarity" in a small jurisdiction. It is small wonder that so few complainants come forward to face the intense glare of public familiarity and choose instead to suffer in silence. We must put an end to that.”
“No. I will get to that in a minute. Thank you for your intervention. <BR /> <BR />Clearly, the balance in such serious cases needs to be shifted, not least to protect identity. There is no need for others to be present, except when specifically directed by the judge rather than by active participants in the trial. The judge will still decide ultimately, but the clear assumption will be in favour of privacy and sensibly so. <BR /> <BR />Let us remind ourselves that we are here to discuss serious sexual offences that lead to serious harm. For too long, the entire system has been biased against the victim. It has almost treated the victim as a perpetrator whose conduct, often at a time of high vulnerability or when another person is abusing his or her power, is assessed in public or even by the public.”
“It is based on the pretence — it is a pretence — that, in trials concerning matters of acute sensitivity, there should be bias in favour of public attendance rather than opposition to it. In practice, that bias is bound to cause distress to victims.”
“I am sure that that will be returned to at Further Consideration Stage. <BR /> <BR />Amendment Nos 18, 19, 21 and 23 are important to emphasise that serious harm is an offence. That should seem obvious, but, for too long, loopholes have existed. They include the defence of consent and the restrictive interpretation of some terms for activity that may cause harm. The amendments, alongside amendment No 20, which is consequential, clarify that serious harm and recklessness that causes serious harm are offences. I welcome amendment No 24, which changes the long title of the Bill to reflect those changes and emphasises that serious harm is serious harm and that intent to cause it is intent to cause it. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 9 is an attempt to reverse the fundamental issues raised by Gillen and others.”
“<BR /> <BR />Amendment No 5 is essential in the modern world, as it covers threats to disclose sexual photographs. We are the only part of the UK where threatening to do that is not currently an offence. Ultimately, it is a matter of coercive control, so it needs to be tackled in law now that we have the opportunity to do so. <BR /> <BR />Amendment Nos 7 and 8, which I welcome, are consequential to those to tidy up the remaining elements of the disclosure offence. <BR /> <BR />I recognise that amendment No 6 is well intentioned, but it is evident that the amendment is not sufficiently detailed to achieve its purpose. Likewise, the intent behind amendment No 11 is clearly worthy, but some consultation is necessary on the significant resource that would be required and where it is to be taken from.”
“I start by re-emphasising what the Minister said about the purpose of the Bill: we are here to enhance public safety and to improve services for victims of trafficking and sexual exploitation. I support amendment Nos 4, 5, 7, 8, 10 and 18 to 24. I reserve my position on amendment Nos 6 and 11. I oppose amendment No 9, which fundamentally works against what the Bill is trying to achieve. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 4 is a response to growing pressure in Northern Ireland and changes in the law in neighbouring jurisdictions. It establishes that the abuse of a position of trust regarding sexual offences against children can cover sport and faith settings. Its scope is based on a wide-ranging review of evidence. I thank the NSPCC for its input on the matter.”
“Although it is unfortunate that the Committee was not able to reach agreement on all the issues, our detailed and thorough consultation, research and report can help any future work and negotiations on a bill of rights. <BR /> <BR />I thank the Committee Clerk and the staff team around her. They did sterling work. It is very much appreciated.”
“We heard from the Human Rights Consortium; international and national academics and legal representatives; civic society; refugees and asylum seekers; the LGBTQ+ community; children and young people; those living with disabilities; those from different cultural and religious backgrounds; and women's groups — to name but a few. <BR /> <BR />As Members will be aware, the Committee is bound by a resolution of the Assembly to submit a report by 28 February, which is what we have before us. Human rights impact on the daily life of everyone in this community. It was a privilege and an honour to be part of the process. I reiterate the Chairperson's thanks to all those who gave so generously of their time to contribute to the Committee's work. Their participation has resulted in a very rich body of evidence.”
“John O'Dowd finished by saying that today's majority may be tomorrow's minority and that he will seek to protect minority rights, regardless of the background. <BR /> <BR />Finally, Gerry Carroll said that a bill of rights should be a bare minimum. He thanked the Human Rights Consortium for its work over not only recent months but many years. He said that the DUP needs to stop being a blocker of rights and that we need to move away from green and orange politics and make stronger anti-discrimination legislation in Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />I thank all Members who contributed to the debate this evening. The Committee Chairperson began by discussing the approach to the work. It was a really valuable process, but, as I said, it is disappointing that we were not able to reach a conclusion.”
“He also said that a bill of rights speaks to a national position rather than a regional one across a political entity; he does not believe in a bill of rights for Northern Ireland; and it would be a constitutional nonsense. <BR /> <BR />John O'Dowd contributed his thoughts about how regrettable and outrageous it is that we have been unable to complete our work. He mentioned the public row, which was very unedifying, about the potential appointment of Professor Colin Harvey to the expert panel. I was pleased that the most recent Committee agreed to write to Professor Harvey to outline our support for him and to state that any public comments were not reflective of our respect for his academic background and work to date on human rights.”
“<BR /> <BR />Mike Nesbitt, the former Deputy Chair, said that, when he was asked to sit on the Committee, he told his former party leader that he was instinctively in favour of a specific bill of rights for Northern Ireland. His positivity and his enthusiasm for engaging with the people coming before the Committee was evident throughout his tenure. He talked about the two parts of his vision, and, as I mentioned, he really appreciated the contributions from the expert witnesses. <BR /> <BR />Jim Allister criticised New Decade, New Approach. He said that it was supposed to be a new beginning but that we have delivered nothing.”
“She thanked all those people who came to us and spoke so sincerely about the ways in which having their rights enshrined in a bill of rights would make a difference to their lives. <BR /> <BR />Christopher Stalford, who is not in the Chamber, talked about the historical context, about how laws can be interpreted by two different judges or lawyers in a court room and about his concern that a bill of rights could be misconstrued. He mentioned that, in this part of the world, we have some of the strongest rights that are enshrined in law. I think that he was genuine when he said that, at times, there was genuine engagement at the Committee in its discussions with contributors.”
“<BR /> <BR />As I said, my party colleague Kellie Armstrong outlined the Alliance Party's position very well. She drew out the areas in which there are deficiencies and highlighted the fact that, from Alliance's point of view, the bill of rights would have had the potential to move us away from the entrenchment of green and orange. She talked about how things such as environmental rights would have been an important addition to our legislative framework. <BR /> <BR />Carál Ní Chuilín went back and talked about the rights deficit that led to the need for us to have a bill of rights. She said that that will come. She said that it needs to come for trans rights, Irish language rights and economic rights.”
“He laid out his reservations in relation to a bill of rights, talked about the differentials in this part of the UK and expressed his concern about an expansionist approach to rights here. Mark Durkan talked about the fact that the lack of a bill of rights affects everyone and about protections for socio-economic rights. He said that the bill of rights would be an integral piece of our peace and reconciliation process and that it is in everyone's best interests that we have a robust bill of rights. Alan Chambers provided an overview of his discontentment with the Committee over the last few months. I can identify with that in some respects in that it got quite messy towards the end; had things run a lot more smoothly, I do not think that we would be in this position this evening.”
“<BR /> <BR />I turn to the contributions. The debate was opened by our Committee Chair, Emma Sheerin. She covered the history of the journey towards a bill of rights in Northern Ireland and very much laid out how intensive the engagement with the different sectoral groups and the contributions from the human rights experts were. We were blown away at times. As the former Deputy Chair outlined, those experts' willingness and their support for us to deliver on this was humbling at times. We really benefited from the contributions from around the world. I place on record my thanks to the Chair for her chairmanship of the Committee. She was at every meeting, full of enthusiasm. Her contribution in steering our work was immense. <BR /> <BR />The next contributor was Paul Frew.”
“As far as I am concerned, so many opportunities are gone for now, such as the opportunity for a preamble that would have set us on course for a more cohesive shared future; the opportunity to provide an effective pre-legislative scrutiny tool and a guiding document for policy decisions; the opportunity to give domestic effect to the rights in international human rights treaties that are not available here at present; the opportunity to protect against the negative impact of Brexit, not least on employment and environmental rights; the opportunity to guard against the unpicking of the Human Rights Act by the UK Parliament in its ongoing review; the opportunity to address years of discrimination and marginalisation felt by so many who have been referenced this afternoon; and, finally, the opportunity to fulfil a long-standing deficit in the implementation of the Good Friday Agreement.”
“I share what is nearly a sadness in the Chamber about the fact that we were not able to deliver for the many people who came before the Committee, submitted evidence, turned up at focus group sessions and spent a lot of time putting their hearts and souls into submissions.”
“My party colleague Kellie Armstrong covered it very succinctly, but I want to lay out my disappointment at how this process has evolved.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Before I begin to wind up on behalf of the Committee, I will add a few words on behalf of the Alliance Party.”
“I am curious as to what rights that were asked for by the people who gave evidence the Member is opposed to.”
“I am grateful to those who have gone through the system or are seeking to adopt through the system at present. Their experiences have been absolutely invaluable. I strongly welcome the Bill, and I support all of the amendments.”
“I had hoped that there would have been an amendment to the Bill or the Children Order to achieve more in that regard. It is disappointing that no further progress has been made. <BR /> <BR />This update to the law has taken so long. A very human penalty has been paid for that, with adoptions here taking nearly twice as long in practice than anywhere else in the UK, even though it is well known that time is of the essence for children in such a position. Our response has been appallingly slow. However, this Bill gives us a chance to move in the right direction. I trust that the amendments move us further in that regard. <BR /> <BR />I place on record my thanks to the NSPCC, VOYPIC, Adopt NI and the many others who contacted the Committee.”
“<BR /> <BR />Like others, I remain concerned that we were not able to secure an amendment in group 2 that would secure access to mother-and-baby institutional records, despite a small step in that direction being made by amendment No 47.”
“I was hopeful that a way forward could be found on that, and I believe that we have found it. Secondly, I remain worried that, where a child is conceived as a result of rape, the perpetrator will still be able to apply for access. I recognise why that cannot be dealt with in this Bill, but it remains a significant concern, as the application alone could cause considerable distress to the victim. That is intolerable, and we need to address it. Thirdly, I still think that we would benefit from stronger legislation to protect children from abuse in general. I recognise that that is not within the scope of the Bill, but the matters are clearly linked. We need to look at that urgently in the next mandate.”
“That is a helpful and vital clarification, and I hope that it will have universal support in the Chamber. <BR /> <BR />I draw particular attention to amendment No 20, which is important and takes us a little beyond the improvements in the original Bill. It will essentially mean that the definition of "harm" does not just include seeing or hearing ill treatment but extends to being in any way affected by it. That reflects modern good practice and common sense. <BR /> <BR />I do not intend to repeat the broader comments that I made at Second Stage, but I will touch on where we have got to with the three points that I raised in that debate. First, amendment No 20 dovetails more effectively with the Domestic Abuse and Civil Proceedings Act, particularly in relation to children affected by domestic abuse, even where absent.”
“The Committee had a wide-ranging discussion about the issue of educational achievement and whether the provision in the Bill on that was broad enough. We felt that it needed to be strengthened, and that is reflected in amendment Nos 14 and 15, which go further than promoting educational achievement, as set out in clause 122(1). We have broadened it to include promoting, facilitating and supporting:”
“It bears re-emphasising that the Adopting the Future strategy was published 11 years after the Children Order, and it is frustrating that we are 16 years on from that. This is the vital work that we are elected to do, which is why it is essential that we move swiftly. I have some reservations with the Bill as it stands. I remain unclear on why there is not a single adoption service for an area as small as Northern Ireland; I sincerely hope that we will have a long-term budget for adoption support services; I wonder why there is not more guidance on fees in clause 11, rather than that being left to regs; and I hope that we are doing enough in regulation and inspection to ensure that welfare, privacy and quality of life are truly paramount. <BR /> <BR />I turn to the Committee's amendments.”
“As this is the first time that I have spoken in the debate, I pass on my best wishes to the Health Minister for a speedy recovery. <BR /> <BR />This is complex legislation. As a Committee, we have done our best to ensure that it will pass with the welfare of the child truly paramount in the adoption process. I echo the thanks of others to the Chair of the Committee for summarising the work that we did in Committee. I also concur with his thanks to the Health Committee staff who worked so hard to provide support to us during the Committee Stage. <BR /> <BR />Despite many people's best efforts, our adoption law is hopelessly outdated. It was designed for a different time when adoption was quite distinct from what it is now.”
“That having been said, the main objective must be to stop hate crime occurring in the first place. Expressions of anti-Semitism, for example, have a grievous impact on a community that already feels vulnerable here. We must take responsibility for promoting, at every turn, awareness raising, compassion and, most importantly, respect. We must all resolutely support our local Jewish community and be clear that this is their home and that they are cherished here.”
“The Bill will pave the way for new, much-needed hate crime provisions that will protect victims to a much larger extent. Through the Bill's specifically defining acts of hate crime and the role of the perpetrator, victims will see better support and are ultimately more likely to see justice.”
“<BR /> <BR />My colleague the Justice Minister Naomi Long has recently outlined her vision for a new hate crime Bill, and I encourage everyone to participate in the public consultation, which closes on 22 March.”
“Between 2020 and 2021, the PSNI investigated 39 hate crime incidents against the Jewish community. Six of those occurred in south Belfast. The issue is now far more prominent, and, unfortunately, it is still conspicuous in our communities. The consequence of such hatred is held closely to our hearts, particularly during Holocaust Memorial Day, the day on which the graffiti appeared. It should be a day when we remember the six million Jewish people who were subject to genocide in one of the most appalling atrocities in human history. It is more important than ever that we highlight the effects that such ignorance and hate have on our communities and realise that we have work to do to overcome them. Such acts only encourage conspiracy and hate.”