Sinéad Bradley
South Down · Social Democratic and Labour Party · Northern Ireland
“<BR /> <BR />Periods have had many different names and have come, as Emma correctly pointed out, in many different colours. Mostly, they were talked about in hushed tones, but that is no more.”
“I, too, support the Bill, and I thank Pat Catney, my friend and colleague, for introducing it. <BR /> <BR />As a Member who sat on the Justice Committee, I am all too aware of some of the harrowing circumstances that young women face every day.”
“Pat's charm allowed everybody to embrace what he is trying to achieve today. I genuinely mean this: the people of Lagan Valley served the House proud when they put Pat Catney here. It is having people like Pat, with a good heart and good intentions, in a place where change can happen that results in days like today.”
“I am privileged to support the motion on behalf of the SDLP. Like other Members of the House, I have heard at first hand about the horrendous and heinous acts that led to the Domestic Abuse and Civil Proceedings Act.”
“I thank Members across the Chamber for their kind words. <BR /> <BR />I suppose that all of us like to consider ourselves to be fair. I include myself in that.”
“I thank my party leader, Colum Eastwood, for hearing my calls, understanding the importance of the Narrow Water bridge and making sure that it was included in the New Decade, New Approach agreement.”
The complete record
Every one of 747 lines we hold for Sinéad Bradley, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 15.
“I thank the Minister for her statement. Although it is damning, it is not surprising. I, too, declare an interest, in that I am a former teacher who was registered with the GTCNI. <BR /> <BR />The Department has rightly recognised the obvious need to uphold the process of teacher registration, particularly at this time. I hope that that runs smoothly and without impediment, because schools are struggling. The GTCNI was left with a further management role, which was to manage professional misconduct. What assurance can the Minister give that immediate cover will be provided for that area so that no misconduct will go unreported during this upheaval?”
“I thank the Member for his reply, and I thank the IS Office, which picked up on my plight, via the question, and swiftly engaged and resolved many of the IT issues that had occurred in my office. <BR /> <BR />The Member rightly refers to the Wi-Fi system in the Building. It is certainly not fit for purpose. To give an example, yesterday, I attempted, from the third floor, to put a question to the Minister of Education. I struggled to hear either the Speaker or the Minister. Thankfully, I was heard. However, it certainly was not smooth. I would welcome any improvement to the Wi-Fi. Will the Member give me an indication of when the issue might be resolved? I think that I speak for most Members when I ask that question.”
“What plans does the Minister have to do an evaluation across the system to be prepared for any disruption that that may cause?”
“Also, be very mindful about proposing anything that may have the unintended consequence of exacerbating loneliness in society. <BR /> <BR />I thank those who have carried out significant work in this area, including the Commissioner for Older People and the Commissioner for Children and Young People, who have taken on a lead role. I also thank all members of the all-party group on preventing loneliness and give a particular personal mention to the Red Cross and Age NI, which have helped me. <BR /> <BR />Finally, I ask Members to be aware that the Christmas season is approaching, throughout which lots of people will, no doubt, feel lonely. I therefore ask all Members to make aware of that all those community groups that can and will help.”
“It can arise during any dramatic time in your life when there is a change in your circumstances. It may even be a positive thing, such as the move into married life: when people are moved from their community or routine, they can experience loneliness. It may be after having a baby or moving house, and it can affect children who have recently moved schools. There are lots of pinpoints across a lifetime when loneliness can be, and is, experienced by many. <BR /> <BR />I am conscious that a lot of legislation is going through the House. I therefore ask all Members, regardless of the field of work or specialism with which they are charged in the House, to take moment and think about any proposals or policy changes that they have in front of them to see whether there is an opportunity to try to work to prevent loneliness.”
“I rise to bring forward an issue that exists across all constituencies. Loneliness was an issue prior to COVID but, unfortunately, has been exacerbated by it. I thank those Members who have joined me on the all-party group (APG) on preventing loneliness, because it is a silent pandemic that is running through our community. <BR /> <BR />I admit that, on embarking upon my role as the Chair of the APG on preventing loneliness, I had a very swift education on who are most affected. I was guilty, as many are, of taking the default position that elderly people are the most affected, particularly around this time of year and the Christmas season when we are around family. I have learned that that is not the case, and plentiful evidence supports that. <BR /> <BR />Without a doubt, loneliness really impacts on a person's quality of life.”
“I appreciate that this is not being drafted in that way, but, ultimately, when we step back and look at the bigger picture, we have to ask ourselves if it can be used in a way that will genuinely work in unison against crime, regardless of who the players are that we are working with. <BR /> <BR />I will leave it at that.”
“The Committee has been repeatedly warned of the suboptimal position that we are in regarding speed of access to data post Brexit. Whilst it is important that we work in unison across all jurisdictions, we must also be mindful of how this work, when tied up and working smoothly together, could feed into a wider picture. It is a smaller world, and it is particularly small when you on an island and part of that island is in the European Union. We must see this as a piece that we have to be tight together on, but we also need to put our minds to it. I ask the Minister to put some context to that if she can.”
“I rise as the SDLP member on the Justice Committee to support the LCM. I state at the outset that, when I see the word "LCM" in front of the Committee, I sit up straight, and, when I hear the words "data sharing", I sit up even straighter. We initially looked at this to question what it was about, and, to be fair, whilst I would always prefer that the work of the House not be done via an LCM, I have to conclude that there are times when it is a good vehicle, and today is an example of that. Any efforts that we make in unison against crime should be with other jurisdictions, and we should not allow any gaps to exist if they are at all avoidable. <BR /> <BR />I will not go over the points that were made clearly by the Minister, the Chair and the member of the Committee, but I will put it in a wider frame.”
“Does the Member recognise that the interests of justice also include making all participants in the justice system feel comfortable and at ease in order for them to be able to achieve justice? Does he recognise that any absence of effort to make every participant comfortable in giving evidence and being part of the procedure will lead to an injustice? That is why we are debating committal reform in the first place.”
“In conclusion, the SDLP will support the Bill and amendment No 3, but we will oppose amendments Nos 1, 2 and 4.”
“The proposed amendments do not do that. They open the goalposts far too wide and create a problem. I appreciate the intent behind them, and I can see where the Member is coming from. Unfortunately, in their current state, we are not in any position to support those amendments.”
“The Minister there, Helen McEntee, has been noting the stressful effect that delays can have on all parties, particularly victims and witnesses. <BR /> <BR />The legislation that the amendments seek to preserve contains, in my reading, too wide a discretion for the courts and could significantly undermine the safeguarding work in the Bill. The SDLP is passionately supportive of safeguarding the protections for victims and witnesses, and we must assure ourselves that any proposals or efforts to seek the retention or reintroduction of anything that resembles a committal process at any time must have tailored, inbuilt protections for the victims and witnesses whom we are trying to safeguard today.”
“When looking at the amendments, the question I had to ask myself was this: if, in, rightly, doing everything that we can to safeguard a cohort of people whom we recognise as perhaps being, at the least, uncomfortable inside the justice system, we look at an amendment that would preserve legislation that, by my reading of it, provides a wide caveat that it is for the magistrate to decide in all cases those in which it may be in the interest of justice to proceed using the preliminary inquiry, that is exactly the opposite of what we are trying to do. One hand is going in one direction, and this legislation takes us to a different place. Having said that, I am mindful that, in the South of Ireland, the Government are consciously contemplating the introduction of preliminary hearings in an effort to speed up their justice system.”
“That said, the question that I have to ask myself is this: had that legislation been commenced, would I look at the amendments in a different light? I know that they are presented in a way to suggest that it had been commenced, and the Member who tabled the amendments gave reasons for that. I assure the Member that it is in my nature not to turn out anything before I am satisfied that it could not be reused or made fit for purpose; I have a utility room at home that gives evidence of that.”
“Weighing any loss in value derived from the committal process in the cases that have been listed against the empowering nature of the reform in supporting victims and witnesses, we believe that it is in the interests of justice to proceed. <BR /> <BR />Having considered the Member's amendments, I am not entirely unsympathetic to their objective. As the Chair of the Committee stated, the Member is not proposing the amendments in order to break the Bill. An important principle — when a judgement has been made by the House, any Department should act on it — has been played out on the Floor. I heard the Minister's chronological account, explaining why that did not happen, but I see that there was a window of time during which it could have happened.”
“My concerns are based on the evidence that we heard of how operational difficulties, such as work on phone triage and technical work that is required ahead of presenting evidence, remain significant blockages in the system. It is therefore unlikely that the removal of committal will result in a sudden, steady flow of cases through the Crown Court; indeed, without a serious eye to the commissioning of resources, there is a strong possibility that a bottleneck situation could be created at the entry level of the Crown Court. <BR /> <BR />The SDLP supports the Bill as a positive next step in reforming the justice system. We do so while keeping an open mind to the fact that the new judicial landscape will take time to become embedded.”
“During our scrutiny of the Bill at Committee Stage, we satisfied ourselves that the objective of taking a significant step to safeguard witnesses and victims in the justice system can be delivered by expanding the list of offences for direct committal and removing preliminary investigations that are based on oral evidence. That is a welcome development that weeds out some of the trauma and intimidation that can risk access to justice. <BR /> <BR />We recognise also how the lag in the committal reform process can add to the delay in case resolution, but I remain to be convinced that the Bill's speeding up of criminal justice will effectively address that delay.”
“It is cited that the oral evidence can also be lengthy, with hearings lasting up to one or two days, and that problems are often experienced in organising witnesses to attend, which can lead to adjournments and increased delays in the Magistrates' Court before a case is sent to the Crown Court. The SDLP, therefore, endeavours to support the safeguarding of witnesses and victims, while aiming to streamline the judicial process more efficiently and remove any additional costs that arise as a consequence of delays. <BR /> <BR />The thinking that has underpinned the draft legislation comes from the Fresh Start panel of 2016, the 2018 Northern Ireland Audit Office report, the 2018 CJINI 'Without Witness' report, the 2019 Gillen review and the 2020 New Decade, New Approach agreement.”
“As the SDLP's member of the Justice Committee, I support the Criminal Justice (Committal Reform) Bill. The primary objective of the Bill is to improve the operation of the criminal justice system by reforming committal proceedings. As the explanatory and financial memorandum recognises, the process of oral hearings and cross-examination before a case is presented to the Crown Court can have a significant impact on victims and witnesses, who have to give often traumatic evidence more than once. The wrong that is being served to victims and witnesses during the committal period is in itself a wrong that is worth fixing in legislation. The arguments that have been made for that are clearly evidenced in the Gillen report of 2019. In addition to those considerations is the often cumbersome nature of the hearings.”
“The Minister cited other legislation relating to cases that may be held against a person who has been established as having been trafficked and said that the person's record would be expunged. Has she given any thought to joining the dots in all that legislation to ensure that any person found to be trafficked walks away with an appropriately clean record?”
“I also acknowledge the Murray, Dorrian and Arkinson families, but, Minister, it is hard to visit this topic and not be mindful of the families of the disappeared. Although they will not find any redress via these measures, they are certainly living with that same pain and injustice. <BR />Does the Minister agree that every single torturous day of non-disclosure should weigh against the murderer in such cases during any parole deliberations? By every day, I mean from the day on which the person disappeared to the day on which there is, hopefully, disclosure. Furthermore, will the Minister look at how we can leave enough of an incentive on the table to make that self-serving murderer eventually do the right thing and disclose, even if it is done late in the day?”
“I will not force this to a vote, for obvious reasons, but I ask that Members at least understand that the currency of the debate was never about a panel to reach agreement; it was about a panel of specialist information coming into a system where such knowledge might be lacking. I regret that some Members failed to see that, even after my explanation, but I put it to the House that the amendment was brought in good faith. Perhaps it will be presented in some shape or form somewhere in the legislation, be that in the explanatory and financial memorandum or in some other form in the Department at a later time.”
“The Minister, rightly, pointed to the cost, but, if there is a cost, I could live with it. If it means one of the victims getting 100% compensation, that is a cost that we would have to take on the chin and subsume into our departmental budget. In order to do that, a bid would have to be made to the Department of Finance, which would have to see that it is something on the face of the Bill and there is no getting away from it.”
“It is only by keeping the parameters open and by fully understanding the absolute effect of the Bill on the reality of 100% compensation that we can say with any confidence that we will retain the 100% for years ahead. I take comfort from the Minister's reassurance on that. Of course, my preference would be to have that scripted in the Bill, because I can look back on what has happened in these institutions in recent times when members of our Civil Service have been charged with something that is perhaps beyond their competency or capability and see that they were charged with getting on with the job. When it goes wrong, the finger is pointed at them. There would have been adequate cover to make sure that the Department was able to resource the measure.”
“I thank the Minister for her intervention. I take comfort from her reassurance, but it is about having that wider knowledge. I was on the Committee for the duration of the deliberations. The Committee took soundings from a multitude of stakeholders across the platform, and it was only after listening to all those representations that we were able to understand exactly what was in front of us. Only then could we determine whether we were on the right road. When the Bill passes, that will still be true.”
“I thank the Minister for her intervention. Perhaps it indicates that I have not fully articulated what I am getting to. There is the pre-assessment period where, before carrying out a review, the Department is charged with looking over paragraphs 14 and 15. I am talking about representatives of victims in that window of time, not necessarily the victims themselves. We must remember that the discount rate does not apply to all settlements, so it is understanding the landscape in which victims are compensated. Some are encouraged to go down another route and do not have to consider the discount rate at all. The Department needs to keep a wide view of that. The Department needs to hold a wide view of the reality of what is happening at any moment in time.”
“As the Bill Office repeatedly remind us, it is all about the words on the page, and the words on the page do not say that a panel will have to be in agreement. This is merely an opportunity to say to the Department, "That is the list of people whom you must engage with as a bare minimum, because those are the people with the specialist knowledge that the Department may lack". It sets a bare minimum not just in the interests of the victim but to make sure that we keep our eye on the 100% target and do not deviate. Today, whilst we may have built up a table that speaks to 100%, there will be other factors and reviews in the years ahead where we have to listen. We cannot turn a deaf ear to those who know what this is about and know what they are talking about.”
“I appreciate the contributions that have been made not just on the Bill, which I fully support, but on the amendment. While I apologise for the lateness of the amendment, legislation is a process, and I will defend any Member who sees fit to come to the House with an amendment at any stage, at any time and on any legislation. I say to any Member who suggests otherwise that that is not indicative of a legislative process that is healthy or with which I would want to align myself. Other Members have a different view, and I heard that today. <BR /> <BR />I thank Mr Newton for his kind words. It certainly was not mischievous in any way. The Deputy Chair of the Committee suggested, as others have, that the panel would have to reach an agreement.”
“At the centre of this very technical and targeted Bill are victims, who, through no fault of their own, are awaiting financial settlements that will help them rebuild their life after a serious injury. The distressing stories of those who are dependent on the Bill are never easy to hear, and those people deserve our support. We have a duty to ensure that all the victims continue to receive access to 100% of their compensation, and we should put in place all the safeguards that we can to ensure that that is the case. <BR /> <BR />If like me, Members believe in the principle of actively listening to expert voices ahead of any review of the portfolio, I urge them to support the amendment. Any concerns with the wording can be ironed out at the Bill's next stage, but the principle is one that I truly believe to be worth supporting.”
“The question that we therefore have to ask ourselves is this: should the Department carry out that role by consulting any such person as it considers appropriate, or do we go one step further to safeguard that critical component and make sure that victims receive 100% compensation by making it a requirement to listen to expert advice? That expert advice could bring an up-to-date perspective to the realities behind the table that is included in the Bill. <BR /> <BR />Some concerns have been raised about the interpretation of the word "panel" in the amendment. I am eager to place on record my willingness to work with the Department or anybody else in the House at a later stage to alter the wording, if it is a requirement. <BR /> <BR />I ask Members to consider the following.”
“It will ensure that any persons in the Department who are charged with making an assessment under paragraphs 14 or 15 of the proposed new schedule C1 to the Damages Act 1996 are given sufficiently scripted cover in the Bill to engage with the level of specialism that they require. Without the amendment, the wording as presented is too ambiguous. <BR /> <BR />In the Bill, we acknowledge our limitations, resources and specialisms and quite rightly agree to outsource the calculation of any rate to the Government Actuary's Department (GAD). The Department is, however, obliged to consider details in the notional portfolio and whether it remains suitable for a hypothetical investor.”
“I acknowledge the very late submission of this amendment and the limited opportunity that that gave for discussion with Members and the Minister on the objectives of today's debate. I hoped, however, that submitting at such a late stage would still allow Members sufficient time to consider the amendment's worthiness and whether to carry it through to later stages, even if that means altering it. I therefore chose to go ahead. <BR /> <BR />The amendment seeks to cover any potential lack of specialist knowledge that could arise in our Civil Service. It seeks to compel the Department to engage directly with the experts listed in the amendment and acts as a safeguard to ensure that the target of 100% compensation is never compromised.”
“I welcome the statement and align myself with the sentiments expressed across the House in support of victims and survivors. The deputy First Minister touched on the issue that I wanted to raise. Although I welcome the commitment to embrace all the recommendations, I was particularly eager that instructions be issued to counsel about the duty to preserve records, and I am pleased to hear that that has happened. For clarity, does that need legislative underpinning or can it be actively embraced today? Can we reach out to those organisations and tell them that they must preserve all the documents and data that they may hold?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I do not want to labour this point, because the principle of the Bill is very important, but I do not think it is simply as black and white as that. I would stand with the Member on very many occasions in not wanting to create a society where gender is airbrushed or cast aside because it is offensive to some, but, on this issue and the possibility of somebody being born intersex, there is a certainly a conversation to be had. I do not think that, for those people, it is as simple as saying that they are male or female. A conversation definitely needs to be had about that, and I would welcome working with the Member on it.”
“I appreciate the Member's giving way. This is the Second Stage, and Mr Catney has made it very clear that he is open to any conversation on amendments to the Bill. In making his statement, has the Member given any consideration to those people who were born intersex and who may menstruate?”
“I genuinely welcome the tone of the debate. I welcome everything that has been said and particularly take note of those added-value pieces with which I will be happy to engage. The SDLP door is certainly open. Once again, I thank Pat Catney for the Bill, and I urge you, Mr Speaker, to use any influence that you have to make sure that it crosses the line.”
“Whilst we are right to focus on the woman or girl who is hoping not just that there is toilet paper but that it is of a decent quality, or is thinking about whether she spends her lunch or bus money on period products, no woman or girl should be left with that question. Society has to support all people who are having a period, and nobody should be forced into poverty because their period is due or they are living in fear of it arriving.”
“I take great comfort from meeting the sponsor of the Bill, Pat Catney, in that he is very much open to discussion about how the Bill could look at its Final Stage. I encourage all Members to get engaged in that and to bring through the Committee, directly to the Member or as an MLA their own mark to the Bill and add value to it. There were examples today of how value could be added to the Bill, and I encourage that. <BR /> <BR />That the Bill is being sponsored by a man, which I welcome and was mentioned, is a good way to break any taboo that may exist. This issue affects society at large.”
“This subject can lie in dark places in society, and these people are desperately in need of our help. Therefore, I am genuinely thankful to Pat Catney for sponsoring the Bill. <BR /> <BR />The House is under a lot of pressure, Mr Speaker, as you are aware, in terms of the legislative ambition for the remainder of the mandate, but this is certainly one Bill that I hope will cross the line. I go back to my point about how respectful the debate has been. This is the Second Stage, and I have yet to stand in the House at the Second Stage of any Bill and say that it is tickety-boo and nothing needs to be fixed or amended. People have made valuable and valued comments in a respectful way.”
“It reaches out to empower people who otherwise are feeling disempowered by a very natural life event. Period poverty creates barriers to living the normal life that you should expect to be able to live and to being able to engage with others. For people to self-isolate because they do not have period products and to remove themselves from society is a real indictment on us if we cannot find a way to reach all those people. <BR /> <BR />I sit on the Justice Committee. During our deliberations on the Domestic Abuse and Civil Proceedings Bill, it became apparent how many women are the subject of coercive control and are caught up in domestic violence. One of the tools and levers used against them is access to money and being able to go out and spend money as they need. An obvious thing in that situation would be to access period products.”
“That is happening, and I welcome that. <BR /> <BR />The principle of the Bill is to reach all those who are suffering, very often in silence, from period poverty. It serves to correct a basic wrong that has endured for far too long. Period poverty is a social wrong that is desperately in need of correction. The Bill is an attempt to do that. <BR /> <BR />When I researched the detail and the stories, there were many harrowing stories of young girls and women who suffered directly an educational or economic disadvantage due to the fact that they could not access period products. Their personal development is affected because there is an absolute loss of confidence when somebody is silently trying to manage that situation. I am really thankful that the Bill speaks to that.”
“I support the Bill, and I thank my good friend and colleague Pat Catney for sponsoring it. <BR /> <BR />Before I begin my speech, I want to say that I am genuinely thankful to all the Members who have contributed to the debate thus far. It has been a very respectful discussion and, at its heart, it is clear that people are concerned about all those who are living with period poverty. It is welcome that the House has united in that common cause while others outside have maybe tried to create moot points. On that basis, I genuinely believe that the Bill is a call to positive action and has already been a catalyst for positive action by others. I thank Chris Lyttle for his work and the Education Committee for agreeing to take the Bill forward. As we know, every Bill has to go through a process, and that requires engagement from all.”
“I appreciate your comments, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, but I made the point about the answer, as opposed to the question, and I ask the Principal Deputy Speaker to give that some consideration.”
“On a point of order, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker. I accept your ruling that this place has set a shorter parameter than other places in relation to contextualising questions, but, although it may take me a while to get to my question, is there any ruling when a Minister never gets to the answer?”
“On a point of order, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker.”
“I appreciate your intervention, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker. I hope that when you hear the question, you will understand why I needed to contextualise it. <BR /> <BR />There is no mention of that, but Invest NI goes on to boast that salary costs are around 30% lower. Will the Minister advise whether he or his predecessors had any part to play in Invest NI's being mute on our economic advantage and its lack of ambition to reach out to secure well-paid jobs for this place on that basis?”
“There is no mention of our enviable economic position. Neither is there any reference —”
“History will show disappointment that we had an Economy Minister who did not see access to both markets as an advantage. <BR /> <BR />Invest NI is entrusted with seeking foreign direct investment. One would anticipate that its messaging should be a fanfare to the world that this place has access to both markets. The headline position on Invest NI's website is:”
“In this case, society, as it is very often, is ahead of the people who claim and purport to represent it.”