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 41 of 49.
“I thank my colleague Chris Lyttle, the Chair of the Education Committee, for bringing forward this important motion today, and thank you, Minister, for being in the Chamber to hear the debate. <BR /> <BR />I will say a few words about the more general situation that pertains to post-primary transfer testing in my constituency. It is not solely an education issue; it ties in with planning, transport, social support and many other matters. First, let us again be clear that transfer is a statutory function of the Department. It is not adequate for the Department to say, "Well, schools decide". The Department has functions that include, but are not limited to, ensuring that, for example, section 75 is adhered to. We are already seeing disadvantage in education being exacerbated by time having to be taken off school.”
“Given how critical time is with cancer, does the Minister intend to use the independent sector more in the winter to bring down waiting lists and waiting times?”
“Last week's nonsensical shenanigans around solo runs have again caused a serious breach of trust. To put that right, we need much clearer, evidence-based decision-making and clearer, united messaging.”
“<BR /> <BR />Consideration of the regulations needs to be backed by clear, published Northern Ireland-specific evidence. That means two things. First, we need to give greater clarity on the basis of the evidence provided by the Executive for the regulations, if we, as a Committee, are to properly scrutinise them and this House is to adopt them. Secondly, we must not waste the next four weeks. By mid-November, contacting tracing has to be reformed and resourced so that it can provide us with clearer and more specific information about the origin of infections and thus how we can best intervene without closing down entire sectors to break the chains of infection.”
“In fact, there was plenty of evidence from elsewhere in Europe that masks should have been worn by all customers until they were seated, that contact details should have been taken for all customers, that ventilation should have been subject to specific legally binding guidance and that risk assessments should have been subject to quality assurance and monitoring. None of that is covered under any of the regulations that we are discussing. <BR /> <BR />I said before that what we are aiming for at all times is voluntary compliance. That will come about if the rules are clear and the reasons for them are provided in a transparent manner. We need to be able to explain to the public, particularly when the decisions that we are taking concern social contacts and economic livelihoods, not just what we are expecting of them but why.”
“It appears, therefore, that we have not been operating on the basis of definitive and clear Northern Ireland-specific evidence. Contact tracing is not able to provide that, and it is unclear what other sources of Northern Ireland-specific evidence there are. <BR /> <BR />Fundamentally, it was either a mistake to reopen pubs or a mistake to close them again. What is understandably galling for the hospitality sector is the lack of evidence either way. Given the lack of evidence, it appears that the regulations were rushed and that the issue of how to reopen pubs and any premises serving alcohol in a safe manner was not fully thought through.”
“That may have been a false correlation, of course, but there was already a suggestion that hospitality was a risk area, and the evidence a month or so on seemed to demonstrate that. <BR /> <BR />I have two particular concerns about our evidence. First, the Chief Scientific Adviser confirmed to the Committee that it is derived mainly from the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) and Independent SAGE. Those are very useful sources, but their evidence is designed for the UK Government and often specifically for England. Secondly, contact tracing has long since failed to provide us with information about the origin of infection, which has made it much harder to identify where to intervene appropriately to break chains of infection.”
“That poses serious questions about where we are getting our evidence, and we did not receive as full an answer to those questions as many of us would have liked. <BR /> <BR />The evidence presented in mid-September was that transmission was largely taking place in households. However, it remains entirely unclear where Northern Ireland-specific evidence is coming from. For example, in August, there were far more applications per head of the population to the Eat Out to Help Out campaign in Northern Ireland than in any other region of the UK. It was exactly at that time that the transmission level rose to a higher rate here than in the rest of the UK for the first time.”
“Before I begin my remarks, I offer my sympathy to the families who have been bereaved since we last spoke about the amendments to the health protection regulations. <BR /> <BR />As the Health Committee Chair noted, we did not reach a decision on amendment No 5, but I will be supporting the amendments this evening. However, the Health Department should use the next four weeks so that, when we come through this round of restrictions, there are better provisions in place for wet pubs in particular to reopen. That is about monitoring the risk assessments and compliance. <BR /> <BR />The amendment was passed by the Executive on the basis of the evidence, which, as we heard at the Health Committee, was subsequently revised.”
“There is irony in DUP and Sinn Féin Members calling for more police officers, when, in office, their Finance Ministers have reduced budgets year after year. If you want it, you have to pay for it. The implications for public safety and security of cutting the Justice budget have to be recognised.”
“Much of what the Department of Justice is trying to do falls into broadly the same category. We must never forget that rehabilitating offenders, for example, is not some soft option. It improves lives directly and indirectly improves society as a whole. It is therefore concerning that Justice has seen a real-terms cut to its budget of 12% since devolution, yet there is no less need for its services. Consecutive Ministers have had to manage rising demand for services on ever-decreasing budgets, often because the outcomes of those services are not immediate and do not suit an electoral cycle. It is time for that short-termism to end and for the funding of the vital services that are designed to keep people safe — the prisons, probation, youth justice, tackling paramilitarism and the rest — to be prioritised.”
“If ever there was a topic that is not about Estimates or Budget lines, it is that. We need to spend whatever it takes on PPE, testing or additional staff to ensure that people in care homes can spend time with their loved ones. <BR /> <BR />We have to talk about the charts and numbers. In the Main Estimates, there is some good news on transformation. The funding of just over £94 million is £13 million more than the original stand-still projection. However, the reality is that the wider health transformation has again, unfortunately, been seriously disrupted and delayed at the very moment when the need for transformation has been demonstrated. <BR /> <BR />I will move on to justice. Much of the health transformation agenda is about early intervention so that significant problems can be avoided down the line.”
“Surely, that is an area to which money could be allocated highly efficiently, but we urgently need plans for how that bid could be made available in this financial year to fund those vital interventions, not least the new strategic direction for drugs and alcohol. <BR /> <BR />The problem with such debates as this is that they concern numbers and tables, but we are dealing with the basics of human interaction and humanity. I agree with many in the Health Committee that the toughest stories that we have encountered recently have been around palliative end-of-life care. We cannot allow the separation — even physical separation — of people from their loved ones in care homes at this time. The seriousness of the strain caused by the lack of social and physical contact with loved ones must not be underestimated.”
“<BR /> <BR />The reform of adult social care has received a funding uplift of £1·7 million. That is welcome, but we must recognise that, in the context of the overall health and social care spending, it is a paltry amount for a care sector that is more vital yet more complex than ever. A tough decision awaits about how exactly we fund care in the future. <BR /> <BR />The mental health strategy is more urgent than ever. I commend the work of the interim mental health champion to carve out a niche providing vital information and sensitivity at this difficult time. However, there is an urgent need for a strategy that takes account of the real issues raised by the pandemic and of the need to link in a raft of other issues, such as victim recognition, tackling addiction and so on.”
“Among the commitments in 'New Decade, New Approach' are some that mean so much to us all: dealing with the waiting lists; the reform of adult social care; three cycles of IVF; the mental health strategy; the new strategic direction for drugs and alcohol; and palliative end-of-life care. Those issues are of high priority for us all. <BR /> <BR />Waiting lists are so long that some services are effectively unavailable, and even being on them causes further health problems for many people, not least around their mental well-being. Even the recent postponement of elective care in the Belfast Trust, for example, will have had a devastating impact on the people who had prepared themselves for it and who will not regard the word "elective" as apt for the vital procedures that they were about to undergo.”
“<BR /> <BR />There is an allocation of just over £600 million for additional spend on COVID in the Health Department. Our challenge relates to the fact that, although the Estimates contain allocations for that money, we have no detailed clarity on how or even if it will all be spent. The question is not what we can aspire to spend but what can be spent. We do not want to arrive at a situation in the new year in which we have not spent money usefully. We need detailed actual spending for that money urgently. The Minister has indicated explicitly that any money not spent out of the allocation will be made available to other Departments, but we need to know now how much that will be, because people need support now. <BR /> <BR />We also have to consider the broader situation around health.”
“However, elective procedures have been postponed or cancelled; support for long-term conditions such as diabetes or Parkinson's is being redeployed so that even basic services are lacking; access to GPs is still extraordinarily difficult in many locations; and we are storing up huge problems down the line. Those problems will cost more to fix when we get to them than they would if services were maintained and procedures could take place now. <BR /> <BR />We are also in the precarious position of still being largely reliant on Barnett consequentials to provide vital uplifts to spending. In effect, our ability to respond financially, as required, is determined by what is deemed required for England rather than for Northern Ireland. At times like this, when we are moving up the curve faster, that presents a considerable challenge.”
“I rise on behalf of the Alliance Party and will focus my comments on health, with some dovetails into justice. <BR /> <BR />This is a dramatically changing financial situation, and I have concerns that vital bids from Health will not be agreed to. Every time that happens, we move closer to a COVID service than to a health service, and it has a hugely detrimental impact on society. The surge framework sees vital work around cancer, as well as some day-care centres, which remain operational but not as they were before the pandemic. The Estimates provide for funding pathways to secure those services.”
“If we are to introduce further restrictions, people need to know what they must avoid because we have to rely on people doing what they think is right in their communities and for their families. We need more buy-in. <BR /> <BR />There is a lot of justified concern among the public. Many cannot face the prospect of a further lockdown while others still feel insecure about leaving things as they are. It is time that we started to improve our evidence and communications, and getting the basic things right. The Chief Medical Officer has been clear that social mixing is the problem, so let us start with proposals from the Health Minister and the Executive for targeted interventions there.”
“When the Committee asked to see the evidence, it never appeared, and the reason has since become apparent. It was because there was never a solid basis for such evidence, and, indeed, the evidence from elsewhere — as far afield as Melbourne or as near as Newport — was that wet pubs and their equivalent would lead to an obvious rise in increased transmission. We were told that the evidence was nuanced, but it really was quite clear. We should not have encouraged social mixing in indoor public venues at exactly the same time as discouraging it in indoor private homes. Either we encourage social mixing or we discourage it. <BR /> <BR />As I said, we have to clarify the reasons.”
“<BR /> <BR />I have serious reservations about the communications from the Executive Office and the Department of Health about the regulations, as well. Gloomy statements containing neither proposals nor action, late on a Friday afternoon, do nothing to guide the population at a time of significant strain. The point has been raised before on evidence that people are getting tired of the same message over and over again. We need to explain to people not only what they need to do but why a measure is being introduced. <BR /> <BR />Communication was not helped by the fact that, in September, amendment Nos 4 and 5 pretty much came in on the same date and were blatantly contradictory. We were led to believe that that was because domestic transmission was a driver so restrictions were required in private homes but not in public venues.”
“What does that tell us about the quality of evidence under which we are operating and developing restrictions? <BR /> <BR />Before I come to communications, I also ask why more attention was not given to the general situation concerning how such regulations would be enforced. The requirement for no more than a single household to congregate in a private home was introduced when students were starting to congregate in our houses of multiple occupation (HMOs). I have spoken so many times about this, so I am not going to repeat it. However, we know that there are students who came to the Holylands in September, went home to their weekend jobs in the retail sector, bringing the infection back into their communities, and the inevitable and predictable happened.”
“Therefore, I ask the Minister to improve the resourcing of the contact-tracing service and urgently to consider amending it to include questions that will identify the location where someone was first infected and not just where they became infectious, as is the case in Asia. That will be crucial in the evidence base needed for going forward with any further regulatory amendments. <BR /> <BR />Unfortunately, what we have seen, from when the regulations were first announced on 17 September, is that we have missed the main areas where infections were rising. None of the initial postcodes to which the regulations applied was in Derry City and Strabane or in Newry, Mourne and Down, despite the fact that those are two of the three council areas worst affected by the rapid rise in cases. The trends were simply missed.”
“The Minister accepted that the scale of the rise in cases, particularly in the Derry City and Strabane District Council area, was totally unexpected. If contract tracing was providing us with the evidence that we need about the nature of infections, such things would not be unexpected. Are we to believe that contact tracing was resourced and able to cope with something so unexpected and to continue to give us the evidence that we need about the actual point of infection? The acceptance that most cases arise from community transmission is an admission that we do not really know.”
“It was subsequently confirmed that a significant share of cluster outbreaks is happening in gatherings in the hospitality sector. <BR /> <BR />We also have a problem with our contract tracing, which was identified just a few days ago by the acting Chief Medical Officer for the Irish Government. We are supposedly able to pick up where infections are taking place by working forwards from where the infectious people are at the time that others become infected. However, contact tracing in Asia works differently by asking instead where a positive case was at the time of infection and not just at the time of infectiousness. <BR /> <BR />Given the sheer scale at which case numbers grew, we need to accept that contact tracing was unable to give us the information about where people were at the point of infection.”
“I believe that she meant primarily in domestic properties, but that was a clear statement to the public that the evidence from the Department of Health was that private homes were at a considerably higher risk than anywhere else. The deputy First Minister made similar comments in an interview at Stormont the following afternoon. However, that jarred somewhat with the Chief Scientific Adviser's advice that the spread of the virus, which had already begun to rise exponentially in some council areas, was being driven by community transmission. Community transmission, by definition, means that the origin of the transmission cannot be identified. Of the cases identified it may well be the case that they were in homes, as pubs were not yet open, after all, but we do not know where many of the infections of unclear origin had taken place.”
“I too want to place on record my condolences to the bereaved families and my enduring thanks to our Health and Social Care staff in battling the virus. <BR /> <BR />I support the regulations and do so, in retrospect, out of necessity. I am extremely concerned about the interpretation of the evidence under which they, and amendment No 4, which was announced at the same time, were agreed. Once again, I need to repeat that there is a massive communications failure on the announcement of the amendment. These failures need to be urgently addressed. <BR /> <BR />First, with specific reference to amendment No 4, the First Minister said at a news conference on 21 September that the spread of the virus was happening in domestic properties and not in other environments.”
“<BR /> <BR />Minister, I will turn to you. Thank you very much for your confirmation that you support the motion and your commitment to supporting your departmental officials to look at how to take it forward. You also recognised the hard work of the stakeholders, the voluntary sector and the families affected. You committed that, when you come up with a prescribed remedy, you will take it to the Executive for approval. <BR /> <BR />Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I will leave it there. I thank everybody in the Chamber for their contributions tonight.”
“Fra McCann said that changing the rules for fast-track applications would remove unnecessary hurdles. He also commended the work done in Scotland in bringing forward the changes. <BR /> <BR />Joanne Bunting mentioned the new all-party group on terminal illness; I am a member of that group along with others in the Chamber. We have so many all-party groups in the Assembly, but this was one that I was very keen to support Joanne in setting up. She talked about the High Court ruling and its use of the word "discriminatory". We can all relate to that. <BR /> <BR />Harry Harvey spoke about people being able to live out their final days free from stress and how the current system is inhumane. People who are terminally ill should not be denied support just because they live longer than the six-month period.”
“I very much concur with what he said. The motion and any legislative change would be about giving people dignity in their final days. <BR /> <BR />The intervention from Robin Newton was very appropriate in that he talked about how the rules are unjust as opposed to being unfair.”
“<BR /> <BR />Colm paid tribute to the work of Marie Currie, the Motor Neurone Disease Association and others. Jonathan, Fra, Robbie and many others commended them on their campaign for legislative reform. <BR /> <BR />Pat said that access to benefits should be as quick and easy as possible and that the current process is degrading and sickening. <BR /> <BR />Robbie said that we should be about helping people. He talked about his work with a constituent who was told that he had 12 months to live but lived for only three months. He spoke about that constituent's struggle for financial support in the last days of his life. <BR /> <BR />Jonathan Buckley made a very good opening contribution in which he said that the motion had great relevance. We have all sat in the Chamber and talked about things that we feel are very repetitive.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I do not think that I will need the full 10 minutes, but I want to reflect the breadth of issues raised this evening. <BR /> <BR />I start by thanking my party colleague Kellie Armstrong for suggesting the motion to our MLA group and for her work behind the scenes to get us to this stage today. She opened the debate by reflecting on how terminal illness affects all of us and how we have to recognise that what we are putting people through is cruel. She said that changing the law will have a cost but one that we will see as an investment at a time when people need us most. <BR /> <BR />Paula Bradley reflected on her experience of the DS1500 form. She spoke about how uncomfortable an experience the completion of that form was for everyone concerned.”
“<BR /> <BR />Last time, I said that I thought that there was still goodwill towards the Executive, but ongoing missteps mean that the public are rapidly losing confidence. As a result, even as case numbers have spiralled out of control, life has gone on almost as normal, with people even queuing to get into pubs and shops. We need to communicate better the regulations and the guidance around them, with less confusion and more clarity, to achieve our stated objective of less social mixing, to reverse the trends in the spread of the virus and to ensure that our health service does not become a "COVID service", as my colleague Pat Sheehan mentioned at the Health Committee recently. We also need to accept where we got it wrong and take the necessary steps to fix it. We have a small window of opportunity.”
“It is not evidence-based. We need more information in the public domain about how the Executive make such decisions. <BR /> <BR />As I said last time, communication is about creating understanding. Compliance and enforcement will be easier if the rules are simple, understandable and enforceable. If our concern is that people should not socially mix, let us put in place regulations and guidance that make that clear consistently and coherently. If we do not want social mixing, do not open venues that exist purely to provide it. If we think that face coverings are important, they should be compulsory at all indoor venues except, perhaps, when eating, where tables are appropriately distanced, or when people are exercising on appropriately distanced equipment.”
“I am extremely concerned that contact tracing appears to be understaffed, people are not being contacted for days after they need to be contacted and, frankly, we are not getting enough understanding of the virus. Two weeks ago, the First Minister and deputy First Minister confidently told us that household transmissions were the big issue. Yet, on Sunday, the Chief Scientific Adviser painted a rather different picture, one in which socially mixing in hospitality venues clearly plays a role but one in which, he had to admit, we do not know the origin of many infections. If we do not know, we have no option but to go on evidence from elsewhere and use basic common sense. Social mixing spreads the virus, so why are we so determined to open places whose purpose is to encourage social mixing? That is a basic failure of public policy.”
“Yet, the very point of pubs is to enable people to mix socially. What does that say? Even within the past fortnight, the Executive Office and the Department of Health were taking action that would inevitably increase social mixing; yet now they are telling people not to do so. That is not what the trends tell us about the rates of cases. The last time that we debated the regulations, I warned that a confused message would get a confused response, and that is what has happened. Even on days when 1,000 people were testing positive, people were packing into indoor venues. It is nonsense. <BR /> <BR />To set out effective regulation, we need to know how the virus behaves.”
“I do not think that we have learned lessons from the last debate on the regulations. There remains considerable, if not more, confusion over what the various regulations mean, how they apply and what they are supposed to achieve. Rightly or wrongly, it is a simple fact that, if people do not understand why they are doing something, they are less likely to comply. <BR /> <BR />As I said then, we are aiming for voluntary compliance, but the truth is that we are often not getting it. That lack of compliance is often tied to the wrong turnings of the Executive Office and the Department of Health in how they have taken forward and put out the messaging and communication. As a result, less than two weeks after pubs opened, we have a rearguard action, with pleas being made for people not to mix socially.”
“I support the regulations as amended. I do so with considerable concern. I put on record the hardship that many owners of soft-play areas went through in the months when they were closed. We all received emails from them. It was disappointing that they were given an opening date that was then rescinded. I understand the thinking behind that, but a lot of them really felt the pressure, especially with the retention of staff. <BR /> <BR />When the regulations came into operation on 11 September, the trend was just beginning to show an uptick in confirmed cases of the virus. Three weeks later, the situation has been transformed for the worse. Part of the reason for that continues to be the utterly confused messaging, as Sinead has just mentioned, sent out by the regulations themselves.”
“I welcome today's appointment, although I am disappointed that Survivors and Victims of Institutional Abuse (SAVIA) and, I presume, other victims' groups were not advised of the appointment in advance of the press statement. <BR /> <BR />Will the new commissioner have any remit to provide support and advocacy to unmarried mothers who suffered abuse in mother-and-baby homes or to children who were abused by clerics in non-institutional settings?”
“What new treatments will be introduced through allied health professionals because we now know more about how the virus affects the body?”
“Are you confident that the £600 million allocated to dealing with the additional pressures and needs arising from COVID will be enough to cover this new surge plan? What new treatments are to be introduced now that we know more about how the virus affects the body?”
“Minister, will you give us your assessment of how the current situation impacts on the Department of Health's ability to deliver services, which will be particularly important in the second wave of COVID? Have you started any conversations with Whitehall about funding for the next financial year?”
“Minister, on that point, the additional category for those eligible for the flu vaccine now includes those who live with people who received shielding letters. Are you assured that there are enough doses?”
“— the NSPCC and other groups that provide such valuable support to victims and their families in dark and daunting times.”
“<BR /> <BR />In the Chamber, we have talked a lot about the needs of various groups of victims, be they the victims of historical institutional abuse, the Troubles, patients' experience of alleged physical abuse in health facilities or victims of domestic and sexual crime. It is clear that the Assembly wants to do everything in its power to support them and to put in place structures and polices to respond to their practical and emotional needs. However, we need to show more urgency, which is why I support the work of the Minister in taking this forward. <BR /> <BR />I place on record my admiration for and appreciation of the work of Victim Support NI —”
“That is why one core connection will, surely, be with the interim mental health champion, as the proposer of the motion will, no doubt, recognise. As we know, the emotional trauma and impact of being a victim of crime are devastating, and it may take many years to get over the trauma, if at all. The forthcoming mental health strategy needs to happen more swiftly than is proposed, not least to ensure that a clear framework and mechanism for delivering psychological therapies and the support necessary to help victims to rebuild their lives can link in to the work of the commissioner.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is inevitable that this will mean that the role will involve linking with other advocates on behalf of those marginalised by or vulnerable to crime. Therefore, it is important that there is clarity in the role of commissioner and in how the postholder will work with existing victims' advocacy groups and then interact with the Justice Department and criminal justice system. <BR /> <BR />In the summer, we saw the launch of the Criminal Justice Inspection report on the care and treatment of victims and witnesses by the criminal justice system. That is another reason why this post needs to move forward. The report identified that crimes can have a lifelong and wide-ranging impact on the victim. One of those impacts is, sadly, almost unbearably, on mental well-being.”
“Therefore, we need to be careful with the definition of "same support" mentioned in the motion. What we really mean is equal access to appropriate services and support. However, these will differ from case to case. What is important is that the commissioner's work produces clear outcomes for all victims and that all victims feel supported. <BR /> <BR />These outcomes may come in the form of amendments to programmes or services, the introduction of services and policies to aid victims, or simply a voice for victims so that they know that they are not alone. The important part is that services, support and advocacy are more-appropriate to the needs of victims than is currently the case and that they are accessible in a timely manner.”
“Each one of us is motivated and disgusted by the callous nature in which victims are targeted, often chosen because of their isolation or other vulnerability. <BR /> <BR />As long ago as 2012, the Justice Committee's inquiry into the criminal justice services available to victims and witnesses of crime, recognised:”
“I am sure that those who tabled the motion and the whole House will recognise that it was great to see that the Justice Minister has put in place that first practical step through the reference group, not just to consider the feasibility of a commissioner but to drive the process forward clearly. <BR /> <BR />The Minister was determined to push it forward because so much value has been seen in the Victims' Commissioner for England and Wales. That role has proved important in providing a strong voice for victims, their families and, notably, for the voluntary sector groups that provide services to them. However, we do not need to look beyond home to see clear evidence of the value of an independent advocate for victims of crime.”