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 7 of 49.
“Thank you for your answer, Minister. I was on Botanic Avenue last night. It is wonderful that there are so many independent hospitality businesses there, but I know from speaking to many of their owners that they find it difficult to expand because they are outbid by multinational and multi-chain restaurants. The Republic of Ireland has put in place a cap on the number of such restaurants: is that something that the Minister's Department would consider to allow independent hospitality businesses to flourish?”
“Thank you, First Minister, for your statement. I will focus on the new three-year corporate plans for the North/South bodies. I am conscious of the fact, but not yet concerned, that there may be some duplication and overlap of work between the language commissioners. What transparency will there be around those corporate plans so that we can ensure that they all work within their own swimming lanes?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Not for the first time in the Chamber, he has demonstrated that he does not do detail. Had he looked at any of the academic research on memorials, he would know that the word "combatants" is used as a collective noun. It was from there that I took that word. The debate has been respectful this afternoon, but, as usual, the Member has tried to use it for political point-scoring. He should be ashamed of himself.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. He knows that I am bringing forward a private Member's Bill. When I have raised the issue of flags in the Chamber, he has said that we cannot have statutory agencies coming in and doing exactly what he has just said about removing flags. He said that communities had to be involved. Why is he now putting this at the Justice Department, as opposed to Communities?”
“<BR /> <BR />We will not support the UUP amendment because it reframes our motion into a criminal justice issue, and that risks turning what should really be a partnership approach into a punitive one. The law already prohibits the glorification of terrorism. The motion is about managing our shared space constructively and inclusively. It is not about punishment but about partnership; not about erasing the past but about building a shared future. The best way to honour the dead is by creating spaces that the living can share, spaces defined by respect not rivalry, by memories that heal not hurt, by remembrance that unites not divides. That vision is at the heart of the motion and is the vision that the Alliance Party will always support.”
“<BR /> <BR />Of course, that work must be done sensitively. Mistakes have been made in the past, such as the removal of Somme plaques by the Housing Executive without consultation. That shows the importance of proper process, engagement and respect. They are all essential if a programme of work such as this is to succeed. If we get it right, Northern Ireland can provide a model for other post-conflict societies, showing that remembrance can become a bridge, not a barrier. <BR /> <BR />We will support the DUP's amendment. We recognise that there are structures there. This is a strange day for the Alliance Party in the Chamber, but we do recognise that there is some really good work going on through the Communities in Transition (CIT) programme and structures. That is probably the best way that that work can be continued.”
“The imagery that replaced that may not have been to everybody's taste or reflect their cultural heritage, but this is about the transition process, in which we can have respectful expressions of our cultural heritage or history that do not offend. <BR /> <BR />To move on — and to speak to Mr Brett's comments — we can and should honour bravery, loss and sacrifice, but we must do it in a way that upholds dignity, legality and values of shared future. The 'Good Relations Indicators 2024 Report' found that more than 80% of people in Northern Ireland want shared spaces to be welcoming to all. The Commission for Victims and Survivors, likewise, found strong public support for respectful, community-led remembrance. This is not about removing memory, but it is about re-imaging it with the communities where that is needed.”
“I welcome the opportunity to clarify that. That is exactly what I am talking about. If you go along the Donegall Road from the RAF mural just outside Belfast City Hospital, you will see that there is a series of them. Today is a very important day for many who commemorate the world wars and subsequent wars. This is not about trying to eradicate their history; it is about presenting what happened in a way that is respectful and dignified. <BR /> <BR />There was some criticism of some of the work that we did to re-image murals. One was a huge mural of King William of Orange. Some people asked why public money was used for it. I said, "Well, look, we replaced a mural of paramilitary figures holding guns and wearing balaclavas".”
“The slow and patient work of dialogue is, in fact, the quickest route to lasting change. Communities that feel respected will lead transformation. Communities that feel targeted will resist it. Some may say that that risks erasing history or culture. It does not. History and culture live on in our museums, archives, classrooms and family stories. What we are talking about is our shared public space, where children play, neighbours meet and visitors form their first impressions of who we are. We cannot tell our children that peace means leaving the symbols of war or terrorism untouched. We cannot expect reconciliation to flourish if the landscape around us still romanticises violence.”
“We know from experience that that approach to working with communities works. <BR /> <BR />The Arts Council's Building Peace Through the Arts initiative has proved that contentious murals can be transformed through dialogue and creativity. Over the course of a decade, more than 90 projects involving some 20,000 people across Northern Ireland showed that, when communities are supported rather than dictated to, they can lead the change themselves. I saw that locally when I worked in the Village area of South Belfast: we successfully re-imaged a series of murals with strong local input and ownership. For example, the poppy trail along the Donegall Road honours loss across both world wars and is a shared story of service and sacrifice that unites rather than offends. <BR /> <BR />As I said, at the heart of the motion is community ownership.”
“The Northern Ireland Housing Executive has confirmed that more than 100 memorials are on its land without planning permission, many of which display paramilitary emblems or references to violence. That is not acceptable in 2025. <BR /> <BR />The motion calls for three practical steps: an audit of memorials on public land to establish a clear and transparent record of what exists, where they are, what is contained on the memorials and under what authority they were erected; a re-imaging programme to support communities to look at replacing violent and exclusive imagery with designs that are creative, inclusive, lawful and dignified; and the development of clear guidance in partnership with the various agencies to ensure that future memorials meet planning law and good relations standards.”
“That is why we must find ways to commemorate that are not just about who we are but who we want to be. <BR /> <BR />Public land belongs to all of us, and its use must be shared, lawful and welcoming. Under the Planning Act 2011, any permanent structure, including a memorial, requires express planning permission unless it has an exemption. If it is on public land, it also requires the consent of the landowner, such as the Housing Executive or the local council. Together, those requirements constitute lawful authority. When memorials are erected without that authority, they are, by definition, unauthorised structures. <BR /> <BR />This is not about politics; it is a matter of legality and equality before the law.”
“Those are precisely the issues that the motion seeks to address. Public memorials can powerfully shape the stories that we tell the people around us. When remembrance slips into glorification of organisations, acts of violence or the conflict/Troubles itself, however, it reopens wounds instead of helping them heal. It creates fear, not reflection, and sends a message that some lives matter more than others and that violence is still to be celebrated. Academic research reinforces that point. Studies by Professor Dominic Bryan and Dr Neil Jarman have documented how memorials, flags and murals can function as territorial markers in contested areas. Rather than being static relics of the past, they actively define boundaries and signal exclusion. As Professor Bryan wrote:”
“We must be honest about the challenges that are in front of us, however. As the Commission on Flags, Identity, Culture and Tradition (FICT) made clear in its 2021 report, memorials are amongst the most sensitive expressions of identity in post-conflict Northern Ireland. The commission recognised the right to remember but warned that, in practice, remembrance too often becomes a source of division rather than reflection. The report's recommendations called for an audit of memorials, a protocol for respectful commemoration and guidance on future memorials, all of which are echoed in the motion. <BR /> <BR />The commission also highlighted where challenges remain. Those challenges include how to handle unauthorised memorials, how to deal with paramilitary imagery and how to ensure that public remembrance does not glorify violence.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Honouring our dead is one of the most profound things that we will do as human beings. It speaks to love, vulnerability and our shared capacity for grief. Across cultures and generations, people carve stones, plant trees and light candles. Those are small gestures that say something very big, which is that we value life and memories and that we have compassion. That need to remember is universal, but it carries particular weight here in Northern Ireland for a society that has known far too much loss. Remembrance is not a luxury but essential. It allows us to acknowledge pain, recognise the humanity of others and begin the slow work of reconciliation. <BR /> <BR />The motion seeks to uphold that right — the right to remember — while ensuring that it is exercised in a way that is respectful, lawful and inclusive.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I remind Mr Frew, who was here at the time, that every time that I spoke on the COVID regulations, I said that, as a liberal party, we supported them with a very heavy heart.”
“We feel that the amendment acknowledges the broader risks not just to Northern Ireland, given our unique circumstances, but to personal privacy and public trust across the UK. This is not about constitutional identity, nor is it about party politics. Rather, it is about practicality, proportionality and protecting everyone's rights.”
“<BR /> <BR />I share the intention behind the motion, but I think that we need to go further. The issue is not whether Northern Ireland should be exempted from the proposed scheme; it is that the scheme itself is fundamentally flawed. It is unnecessary, unworkable and unlikely to deliver the security and efficiency that it promises. Ultimately, the debate is not about technology but about rights, privacy and respect. People deserve to know how their personal information will be used, that their identity will not become political property and that their privacy will not be treated as expendable. For those reasons, I will support the motion and the DUP amendment. The amendment recognises that the scheme cannot simply be tweaked or improved and therefore needs to be binned entirely.”
“<BR /> <BR />For Northern Ireland, the concerns are amplified. Our constitutional and social landscape is complex and sensitive. People here have the right to identify as British, Irish or both. That is part of the Good Friday Agreement, and it matters deeply to us all. Any digital identity scheme must represent that pluralism, not undermine it. A one-size-fits-all digital identity scheme from Westminster risks cutting across the delicate balance that has helped to sustain peace and stability here. Then, there is the simple, practical reality of life on this island where thousands of people cross the border every day for work, study and family reasons. A UK-wide system that ignores that fluidity risks creating confusion and potentially unnecessary bureaucracy. Once again, Northern Ireland seems to have been treated as an afterthought.”
“Databases have been exposed online, and personal information has been sold illegally. In Estonia, which is often held up as the model of digital government, a flaw in the national ID cards' encryption left citizens' data vulnerable and forced a national recall. Singapore's Singpass system has seen thousands of compromised accounts appear on the Dark Web. In Ukraine, the platform that digitised identity and public services has been repeatedly targeted during the war, proving that centralised data systems can become key targets in times of crisis. Therefore, when UK Government Ministers tell us that the technology is safe, we have every reason to be sceptical. No system up to now has proven that it is unhackable, and, once trust in government data handling is lost, it is almost impossible to rebuild.”
“<BR /> <BR />Beyond the politics, there are real concerns about fairness and accessibility. Not everyone has a smartphone or feels confident with technology. For older people, those on lower incomes and those without digital access, the scheme could become another barrier — another way of their being excluded from services that belong to us all. <BR /> <BR />There is also the issue of trust, which is the most fundamental of all and something that the Alliance Party cares deeply about. Placing everyone's personal data into a single, centralised system is a huge risk. Who controls that data? Who uses it? How secure is it? Governments around the world have learned the hard way that even the most advanced systems can fail. In India, the digital ID scheme has seen repeated breaches.”
“I thank Sinn Féin for tabling the motion for debate. As I said to a previous contributor, I raised the issue as a Matter of the Day in the Chamber when the UK Government first announced it, and I have not seen any evidence since that dissuades me from thinking that it is the wrong approach. The proposal will try to fix a problem that does not exist. There is no evidence of widespread identity fraud or any system failure that would justify something so intrusive, expensive and complex. It feels less like a genuine solution and more like a political exercise. Meanwhile, people here are dealing with far more pressing issues, such as the cost-of-living crisis, access to healthcare and pressures on our public services. Against that reality, spending millions of pounds on a national digital ID scheme seems, at best, misguided.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I brought this issue as a Matter of the Day about a month ago, and I referred to it as the "BritCard". I did not really think that that would cause offence, but, that day, it was clear that it does cause offence to some Members. Did you not reflect on that after that Matter of the Day and consider that you could have tempered the way that you term the digital ID scheme to reflect greater cooperation in the Chamber?”
“Thank you, Minister, for your statement. I remember having conversations many years ago with Ian McSorley from Sandy Row Boxing Club about this very issue, so I am delighted to hear that the Minister is taking firm action today. I share his encouragement and congratulations to Lewis Crocker from my constituency. <BR /> <BR />The code of conduct is not just needed for boxing and could possibly be replicated in other sports. Is that something that the Minister is minded to do if it proves to be successful?”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. Will he please outline what he feels will be the impact if we continue to dither and delay on climate action?”
“Can the Minister provide an update on his Department's review of the public angling estate?”
“Let us move forward from a system that shields Ministers to one that earns unequivocal public trust.”
“Accountability cannot depend on political convenience or legal rulings after the damage is done; it must be built into the system. Our goal in the Assembly is to forge institutions that are stable because they are fair, transparent and bound by consequence, not because they are frozen by inertia. <BR /> <BR />We will not support the Sinn Féin amendment. I will allow my colleague Michelle Guy, who sits on the AER Committee, to speak to that. I have spoken to Mr Gaston about the ability of the Commissioner for Standards to put forward sanctions. The TUV amendment removes the provision for reform, which is a key part of the Alliance Party's aspirations for this place. Reforming our internal systems is the only way to honour the promise of partnership agreement.”
“We need a clear, independent and transparent process for dealing with breaches of the ministerial code that removes the power of sanction from the partisan politics of the Executive. That process must apply to everyone, regardless of party or position. Furthermore, when a Minister acts outside their authority or contrary to the law, breaching the collective principles that the 2021 Act reinforced, it must ultimately be the authority of the Assembly, representing the people, that delivers the consequence. <BR /> <BR />We should also note the ongoing importance of ensuring that Ministers neither act in a way that glorifies terrorism or paramilitarism nor show favour to those who participated in such things. Their task is to heal wounds, not repeat them.”
“Yes, I agree. They need to take full ownership of addressing the deficit here. <BR /> <BR />We must be clear that legislation that dictates how the Executive should function is only half the battle. The Assembly has failed to create and implement the internal institutional enforcement mechanisms that are required to make the Act meaningful. For the Alliance Party, achieving real accountability requires two key changes to the institutions.”
“The Act was intended to codify the expectation that Ministers work together, ensuring that decisions are not taken unilaterally but are legally and explicitly bound by the collective will of the Executive. <BR /> <BR />I will pick up on Mr Brett's point towards the end of his speech. He criticised the call in the motion. I understand why he put that at the feet of the First Minister and deputy First Minister because they are the co-chairs of the Executive Government here.”
“We have witnessed Ministers acting unilaterally and taking critical policy decisions without collective Executive agreement. In those cases, it has fallen to the courts, as I just mentioned to Mr Brett, not the Assembly, to rule that Ministers have acted unlawfully or outside their legal duty. <BR /> <BR />That failure means that the ministerial code is treated more like a set of optional guidelines than mandatory standards. Crucially, that is why the Functioning of Government Act (Northern Ireland) 2021, which was introduced by Mr Gaston's predecessor, is so important. Its core purpose was sound. It aimed to strengthen the legal duties around collective responsibility and prevent Ministers from acting as solitary agents.”
“The motion before us today addresses what the Alliance Party views as one of the greatest threats to the stability of devolution, and that is the structural failure of accountability. Across the institutions, there is fundamental and dangerous imbalance. Ministers are given immense power, but the mechanisms to hold them to account are weak, inconsistent and often paralysed by political deadlock. That is not a theoretical concern: we have seen repeatedly how that systemic weakness erodes public trust and damages the integrity of government here. <BR /> <BR />We have seen crises around the renewable heat incentive (RHI) and Red Sky that have shown spectacular mismanagement and colossal failure of duty, yet there was no political or institutional means to ensure that the Minister involved was promptly removed or sanctioned.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. That points cuts to the heart of the matter in that we are reliant in many ways on the courts to rule on whether there has been a breach of the ministerial code, when we should have in our gift the mechanisms and the sanctions to act on such breaches.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. You will be surprised to hear that I will, in my speech, praise your predecessor for bringing forward the Functioning of Government Act. I am a bit concerned that your amendment does not highlight the fact that there is no automatic sanction and that, under it, whether something happens when a Minister breaks the ministerial code will still be a political issue. Will you speak to that, please?”
“The update on the plaque is good news. What work is going on between victims and survivors' groups and the Arts Council on the wider programme of memorialisation that the inquiry report recommended?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I did not mention this, because I always mention it in the Chamber, but when my son left the RAF, he was told about the bars and clubs that he was not to go to, not just because of republican paramilitary threat but because of loyalist paramilitary threat. I echo the point made to the other side of the Chamber that a really important message could be sent that the past should be left in the past and the threat from paramilitary control, coercion and potential violence to any section of society should be shunned. Supporting the motion would send a message that the days of the paramilitaries and the threat that they pose to society are over.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I listed a few examples, but I totally agree that socio-economic background could be looked at as a category. However, some people sign up for the armed forces to escape poverty, because they see the opportunities that would be afforded to them through the different forces. I want that to be on the record too.”
“There are possibly other sections of society that need extra protection to ensure that they are not being disadvantaged and discriminated against. <BR /> <BR />As an Alliance representative, I see providing protection for veterans against discrimination as being an integral part of building a shared and inclusive society that respects different experiences and builds bridges not barriers. I support the motion, not only to honour servicemen and servicewomen but to help us in the Assembly to live up to our highest values of fairness, inclusion and equality for all. Let us ensure that our commitment to the covenant is not just written in law but lived out in practice through real support and opportunity for all those who have served.”
“<BR /> <BR />I did not think that it would be appropriate to try to amend the motion, knowing the work that the Veterans Commissioner and others have engaged in for many weeks and months in order to agree its wording. However, we, as an Assembly, should consider writing to the Secretary of State regarding section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act. I would like to see the Secretary of State reviewing the list of protected characteristics under section 75 to assess whether it would be appropriate or necessary to include ex-service personnel. I have said publicly at the Executive Office Committee several times that that review could also look at greater protections for minority language speakers, the Travelling community and looked-after children. Those are just some examples.”
“<BR /> <BR />The recent legal duty that was placed on our public bodies to uphold the covenant is a welcome step, but, as always, the key is delivery. Every Department, from Economy to Health, must now actively demonstrate how it is meeting that duty. While I appreciate that every Department is facing significant budgetary constraints, I sympathise with the idea of a dedicated departmental armed forces liaison officer to ensure that the needs of veterans and their families are understood and acted upon. This is not about hierarchy; it is about equality, respect and opportunity, and it is about ensuring that those who have served globally are supported when they return home.”
“For some, it means leaving behind a job and, in some ways, an identity, a sense of belonging and a shared purpose. There is also the impact that spending years on active service will have had on many people's health — I am thinking of mental and physical injuries — and on their ability to secure housing and, in turn, stability. For example, many veterans will have been on active duty overseas when their peers were getting on the property ladder and buying houses, . Furthermore, there are servicemen and servicewomen who have dedicated time and effort to getting trained in specialised roles in the armed forces but found that those qualifications and skills are not fully transferable to other trades and sectors. That is precisely why the armed forces covenant matters. It is a commitment to equality.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is understandable that, here in Northern Ireland, we associate the armed forces with conflict. However, I recognise that their work extends far beyond the battlefield. Around the world, servicemen and servicewomen are on the front line in securing and maintaining peace, delivering humanitarian aid, supporting post-conflict societies and rebuilding the very foundations of civic governance. For example, when we think of the devastation that has recently been visited upon the island of Jamaica, not many of us will be cognisant of the fact that HMS Trent is standing by ready to deliver humanitarian assistance and help with recovery efforts on the island. <BR /> <BR />The transition to civilian life is not always straightforward, something to which veterans' associations can attest.”
“I am pleased to speak in support of the motion. I thank the motion's sponsors for allowing me to put my name to it in the Order Paper. It is important that we try, as far as possible in this place, to not view this being as a green versus orange issue. I appreciate that there are many in our society who view the armed forces exclusively through the British state lens and that hurt remains as a result of some incidents that happened during the Troubles. I am very much aware of that. However, the motion focuses on the present. It rightly recognises the immense contribution of our serving personnel, service leavers, veterans and their families, and, crucially, it calls for practical action in adhering to the armed forces covenant to ensure that no one faces disadvantage in accessing public services.”
“Thank you, Minister. I recently met the Inner South Belfast parents' support group of Autism NI. It is a key issue for them, because they have been fighting their whole life for support for their children. Do you have any firmer timelines for when they will start to see the programmes being implemented on the ground?”
“OK. Minister, you will have received a letter from Stranmillis Neighbourhood Association asking for a consultation on a scheme between Landseer Street and Ridgeway Street. When will you respond to that? When will that consultation open?”
“There is the need for a new swimming pool at Lough Moss. I know that the councillors will be given some options, but the people of Castlereagh South deserve that. We have only one post-primary school in the DEA: Breda Academy. We need to see more post-primary schools, not least — this is an Alliance Party ambition — an integrated one. Lastly, the broader issue of access to public services needs to be included in the debate, because we have far more families and far more businesses etc and are not keeping pace with the provision of GP practices and other health and social care provision. In summary, we need to keep pace with the growing population. There is a role there for central and local government. We need to ensure that the needs of individuals and their families are met.”
“We need to be ambitious in their delivery, not just for cosmetic improvements but to address the public safety issues that remain there. <BR /> <BR />My colleague Councillor Bronagh Magee is working to ensure that there is a permitted route from the beautiful Lisnabreeny National Trust site in the Castlereagh hills. A new development is going to happen at Mount Ober, and she is trying to make sure that there is a permitted route through that development. Minister, you should maybe think about that as a policy area to ensure that, where there are new housing developments on the green belt, people are allowed to remain and have access to the green fields and beyond. <BR /> <BR />With your indulgence, Mr Deputy Speaker, I want to put on record some infrastructure issues that are not within the purview of the Infrastructure Minister.”
“That would not be just for people who want to get to the shops but — again, the issue has been raised — for young families who want to encourage their children to walk and cycle to school. We need to see more work around trying to get our roads connected. <BR /> <BR />Linked to that is the perennial issue of speeding. Newton Park, Purdysburn Road and Cairnshill Road are three routes that are regularly raised with us as areas of concern. Yes, the police and community safety partnership (PCSP) moves the speed indicator devices (SIDs) around, and, for a while, people adjust their driving, but it is not long before they start speeding up again, so that is an issue of concern. <BR /> <BR />Matthew O'Toole raised the recent consultation on potential public realm works in Carryduff. The proposals are great.”
“<BR /> <BR />On the public transport issue, my colleague Kate Nicholl raised the issue of regularity of buses. Sometimes they do not turn up, and sometimes the information for commuters is out of date, both of which can be frustrating. However, that is just part of it. When we were out engaging with residents on Saturday morning, I spoke to a man who lives in Beechill Park Avenue, who said that he just wants to be able to walk to the Forestside area with his family but that his only route is down the Saintfield Road, where the speed of the cars and the urban grey jungle make it unappealing. I very much concur with others on the need to see progress on the Carryduff greenway.”