Gerry Carroll
West Belfast · People Before Profit Alliance · Northern Ireland
“Yesterday morning, as others did, I stood alongside our resident doctors as they commenced a 24-hour period of industrial action. We often praise our healthcare workers in the House and more generally, saying things such as that they are invaluable and that we wish them well.”
“If we have learnt anything from the political events of the past week, it is that powerful people — powerful men, in particular — and institutions should always be held to maximum account when it comes to abuse, neglect and victims, and that victims and survivors should be believed and supported on every occasion.”
“Agency spend has, again, gone through the roof and is sky-high; locum spend has gone up and continues to go up — it has gone up by in the region of £0·5 billion over the past few years; and, almost every single year out of the past five to 10 years, hundreds of millions of pounds of public money have been pumped into the for-profit privat…”
“With bills increasing month-on-month and year-on-year, that is true, and those workers need a proper settlement that meets their needs and the ever-increasing cost of living. One striking doctor put it to me starkly yesterday. They said that they left Scotland and took a more senior position in the health sector in Belfast.”
“I commend Stephen and his colleagues in the Bill Office and the Executive Office officials, who worked closely with me to try to support, amend or help along my amendments — whatever way you want to look at it. I also want to commend the Member for Fermanagh and South Tyrone who spoke out during the last few stages.”
“I commend people for speaking out on the issue, especially Sharon Burke. I think that she might be in the Gallery. She has been emailing Members on that issue.”
The complete record
Every one of 4,137 lines we hold for Gerry Carroll, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 83.
“I thank the Member for giving way. Will he agree that the use of the petition of concern represents an abuse of it and shows that the DUP and the Member to my right, who is staring at me in a weird way again, have simply lost the argument and that all they have left to roll out is that mechanism? Does the Member agree that that is why they have done it?”
“Going by the Member's logic, does that mean that there is a mass of nine-year-olds committing crimes left, right and centre?”
“I appreciate the Member's giving way. While I disagree with her final conclusion, I agree with pretty much all of what she has said so far. Does she agree that 14 is regarded across the world among human rights and children's rights organisations as being the floor and that we should probably aim for the ceiling and the best approach, which is generally accepted to be 16?”
“I appreciate the Member's giving way. Does she agree that, in the past week, it has primarily been adults who have been responsible? Adults have poured the petrol, while kids have been pushed out to light the flames. Those adults include Elon Musk, big tech and other divisive figures. There are also, of course, some adults in the Chamber who often like to stir the pot and stir up anti-migrant sentiment.”
“I agree with your sentiment and your words, Minister. Can you indicate whether your Department has been in conversations with the trusts and healthcare workers about extended leave for people who are trying to rebuild their homes or their lives after their homes were burnt out and they were threatened over the past week? Have there been any discussions at Executive level to ensure that healthcare workers are not at a financial loss because of being burnt out or because of being prevented from going to work because of the events last week?”
“Minister, do you share the concerns expressed by the Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers (USDAW), which represents most of those retail workers, that allowing larger shops to open for longer on Sundays would have a negative impact on retail workers, their families and our communities and put more pressure on low-paid workers, in that they would feel as though they had to work rather than spend time with their family, with their community or, indeed, if they wish, at their place of worship?”
“The state was nowhere to be found last week. The people who intervened were the community groups, the solidarity groups, the women's groups, the anti-racism organisations and political reps. That will be the key to protecting our society and communities and to pushing back the far right in the months and weeks ahead.”
“I also extend my solidarity to the journalists who have been intimidated and threatened over recent days. It is important that the ugly scenes and the ugly face of this society are shown to people who live here and across the world. Journalists have been threatened by people who cannot defend their wanton violence and far-right ideas and who, instead, intimidate. Solidarity to the journalists and crews. The way to deal with racism is not through more violence and hate and especially not by shooting plastic or rubber bullets at working-class kids who are being exploited by loyalist paramilitaries. <BR /> <BR />There are also huge questions to be asked about how the PSNI handled last week. It refused to intervene to protect the people who were targeted and whose house in multiple occupation (HMO) addresses were being shared for some time.”
“You are very much part of the fabric of our society and make it better. As Suleiman, a Somalian, said on Saturday, he is not part of an alien culture. I commend him and everybody else who turned out at the largest anti-racist demonstration in the history of Belfast, with some 20,000 people in attendance. <BR /> <BR />Unfortunately, across our society, we do have a problem with violence in our communities. It is wrong to blame that on one particular community or on one particular group of people because of their race or where they may have been born. I note that the same forces that were causing havoc in the past week did not utter a peep when, over the past six years, disgracefully, 30 women were killed in this society.”
“The violent scenes that we saw last week, where loyalist paramilitaries and the far right ran amok across our communities, instilling fear in our migrant, asylum seeker and black Irish and black British communities, have to be condemned and called out by everybody as a racist pogrom. Our communities are living in fear, and they have been for some time. At least 200 families have been burnt out of their homes or forced to flee because of that violence. We do not have an immigration problem in this society, but we do have a racism problem. <BR /> <BR />I extend my solidarity to everyone who has been under pressure and living in fear over the past week. Despite the racist, dangerous and violent actions of a minority, you are welcome here. Migrants and asylum seekers, you are welcome in this community. You belong here.”
“Thanks for that answer, Minister. As you said earlier, it is understandable that people in north Belfast are fearful, given the horrific events. You will be aware that protests are planned across Belfast, if not across the North, this evening. We do not know how they will develop, if at all, but you mentioned fears in our migrant community and among people of colour that the protests may turn nasty and violent. What is your message to people who are fearful of how the protests may turn out?”
“No community should be singled out or blamed for the heinous attacks of an individual, regardless of their skin colour or the country or city that they were born in. <BR /> <BR />The local community in north Belfast is, no doubt, deeply troubled this morning. People are reeling, upset and anxious, and they do not deserve or need more violence or intimidation on our streets. They need our support and understanding and to have the ability to begin to try to process this horrific event.”
“That will serve only to bring more harm, more fear and more hurt to our communities. <BR /> <BR />Attempting to use this tragic event to whip up racism should be called out and absolutely condemned. I condemn that this morning, and I call on other people, who are troubled and horrified, to also condemn that and not to go down that very dangerous path. We have seen where that leads to. We saw the events of last summer in Ballymena, when refugee and migrant families were burnt out of their homes in retaliation attacks that solved nothing and only instilled fear. People are now stockpiling food because they are fearful of another hot summer, and I am fearful of that as well. This should be a warning sign for us to act.”
“<BR /> <BR />I also appeal for calm in the wake of the attack. Undoubtedly, anybody who has seen the footage or heard about it will be deeply troubled — that is a natural response to such a horrific event — but organised violence and escalating the situation is not the answer.”
“I say unequivocally that the violent attack on a person in north Belfast last night was totally unacceptable, wrong and horrific. My thoughts are with the victim of the attack and their family. This was a dangerous and horrific attack that nobody should ever have to experience or witness. Like others, I commend those who intervened in a quick-moving but dangerous situation to help the person who was attacked. I commend them for their quick actions and intervention. There is no doubt that the event will have a lasting and traumatic impact on the family of the person who was attacked and the wider community in that part of north Belfast, and they need to be given the space to process what has happened, but also services should be put in place to support the people who experienced, saw and heard what happened last night.”
“<BR /> <BR />In conclusion, we will support the amendments that protect people by repealing the criminalisation of poverty and ending the relic of blasphemy and those that strengthen the protections for people facing domestic abuse. We will do our best to oppose other amendments that simply widen the net of criminal law and hand more power to the state without any evidence or rationale, but I appreciate that it may just be me who does so.”
“<BR /> <BR />I have no problem supporting amendment Nos 88 and 89 on domestic abuse and harm to animals. In fact, I will be glad to support them. It was quite concerning and upsetting to listen to the Members opposite talk about such abuse. The fact that an abuser may use threats and violence against a victim's pet as a deliberate weapon and as a way to trap them in an abusive home, because they will not leave the animal behind to get hurt, is quite upsetting. As someone who has a dog, I concur that pets are absolutely part of the family. Recognising that in our domestic abuse protections, as amendment Nos 88 and 89 do, is a welcome and evidence-based step that will help to keep victims and their family safe.”
“I thank the Member for that. However, I repeat: it is too broad and criminalises people even when they are engaged in services through choice. They are adults who know exactly what they are doing. They are intelligent beings. I therefore have a concern about lumping everything into that amendment. <BR /> <BR />I will make some progress, Members will be glad to know. I am concerned about sweeping up and criminalising the tools that sex workers rely on to stay safe, to screen clients, to work indoors and to stay off the streets. We were warned a decade ago that criminalising the trade would drive it underground and endanger the most vulnerable, and that was correct. We will therefore not support amendment No 78, because we do not support the criminalisation of sex work and do not want to put people at risk of further exploitation.”
“I will give way briefly, because I have been generous with my time.”
“That is incredibly broad and does not protect women who do that. I do not claim to speak for all, or any, women, but women do say that they engage in sex work by their own choice, regardless of whether I or anybody else likes it, morally speaking or otherwise. My problem is the lumping together of those two things.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. Wittingly or unwittingly, he is lumping two issues together. I have no problem with article 64B sub-paragraph (1)(b), about a person who "coerces" —. I am not opposed to it being an offence to force people to display sexual images. That is a horrible practice, and I am fine with supporting ending it. The problem is with article 64B(1)(a):”
“I thank the Member for her very helpful intervention. I am often told by Members — not her — to read the amendment or to read the legislation. I invite the Members to my right to do the same, because they are completely lumping two different issues side by side, which is problematic. I concur with the Member's points. In a general sense —.”
“The Member is not listening, or maybe he just does not understand. There is no disagreement about or issue with criminalising the exploitation and coercion of people. There should be prosecutions for that, but, seemingly, the Member supports the lumping together of all sexual services. Are you really putting people who use OnlyFans alongside people who are being sexually exploited and trafficked? It is bizarre stuff and bad legislation.”
“I do not know if those figures are correct. I am not saying that the Member is wilfully misleading the House, but then you are going to criminalise the 10% of people who engage in sexual services through choice, and that is what the amendment will do because it lumps the two together. I have absolutely no problem with prosecuting those who exploit and coerce people into providing sexual services but this is a catch-all amendment that includes sexual services where people engage consensually as adults alongside exploitation and people who are being trafficked. <BR /> <BR />I will give way to the Member to my right.”
“Everybody is opposed to exploitation and coercion, but I am concerned about their being lumping together with consensual sex work.”
“The Member made the point for me. He said a "minority", but I do not know what evidence he is citing. I do not believe that there is even a report on that, but if there is he can send it on to me and I will happily read it. He mentioned that people engage in the sex industry without being coerced, so he is making the point for me. He is lumping coercion and exploitation alongside sex work, which, as the Member for South Belfast said, is the oldest trade, so there is a problem there. I dispute the figures that the Member referred to in passing, but I have a real problem with the lumping of sex work that adults engage with in a consensual way with exploitation and coercion, the tackling of which nobody is against.”
“I have some issues with amendment No 78, similar to those outlined by the Member for South Belfast. We are, obviously, unequivocally opposed to exploitation, coercion and trafficking. Where those things exist, the full force of the law should follow. People should be prosecuted and stand trial for that. That is not solely what the amendment does, however. It also criminalises the advertising of sexual services "regardless", to use its own word, of whether anyone makes a penny from it. That is sweeping and general, and I share the Member for South Belfast's concerns about targeting and criminalising people who engage in sex work. Regardless of whether people morally like it or not, it happens, it is a reality, and adults make a choice to do it and take part in it. I am concerned that those things are being lumped together.”
“Muslims face racism, harassment and all sorts of other repressive actions. I found the Member for North Belfast's comments about a cabal of "left-wing comedians" strange. I would like him to show me examples. We have to challenge the idea that Christianity is under the cosh or under challenge. That is not true. For that reason, and many more, I will support amendment No 73. I thank the Member for tabling it.”
“The offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel are a relic of an old, outdated age. They have no place in a modern society that values free expression. I would challenge the assertions that were made by the Member for North Belfast and, I think, the Member for North Antrim that Christians are under threat in the UK and Ireland. That is simply not true. There is freedom of expression, freedom of religion and freedom to practise religion. As an atheist, I defend the right of any organisation, including Christian organisations, to retain that freedom. A lot of myths are being put out, and we need to challenge them in respect of this amendment and more generally. I also challenge the assertion, which was made in different ways, that Muslims have it easy or great in Ireland, whether in the North of Ireland or elsewhere.”
“I was initially talking about misuse by the police, but it could be misused by a shop owner, a business or somebody who does not like somebody else and wants to complain about them. It is broad, and there are no safeguards in that regard. I have concerns about that. <BR /> <BR />Poverty is not a crime, and those who are destitute are not criminals. The Member spoke earlier about coercion, trafficking and people being exploited. There are already laws to deal with those crimes, where there is real concern that they are happening. I will not support re-criminalising begging in a different way, through a different amendment, although I realise that I may be in a minority of one. <BR /> <BR />I support amendment No 73, which relates to the abolition of offences of blasphemy. It was straightforward, to me, on my initial reading.”
“That criminalises intention and presence. In my view, it is ripe for misuse, not only against homeless people who are sheltering wherever they can — who would blame them for doing so? — but, potentially, protestors who are using their right to freedom of speech. Hopefully, we will soon repeal a law that criminalises the vulnerable, so let us not pass another that will do the exact same thing. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 72 relates to facilitating begging for gain. I have major issues with that amendment. It would do a similar thing to amendment No 71, which is to criminalise through the back door. While it is likely that the House will repeal the vagrancy law, amendment No 71 would bring a similar activity into criminal law. Poverty is —.”
“Having said that, I have concerns with amendment No 71. I am happy to give way on this. Like most people, my party and I welcome the repeal of a law that criminalises the poor. However, I am not sure about waving through a new one, by way of amendment No 71, which, again, is extraordinarily broad. We would be making it an offence to be "in any enclosed area" with:”
“The Vagrancy Act is a 200-year-old law, the entire purpose of which was to criminalise poverty and the poor, to kick them, to lock them up and to make it a crime to be homeless and to be forced to beg. It is Dickensian through and through. It has no place in modern society, and it should have been done away with a long time ago. Nobody should be arrested for being poor. Obviously, I will support that amendment, and I commend the Minister for tabling it.”
“I thank the Minister for that clarification. Broadly, I welcome that approach. Again, I am happy to give way on this. In my earlier comments, I stated that, from reading the amendments, somebody could be found guilty even if they did not know any of the people in the group and even if a crime that they were supposedly part of was never actually carried out. That is my reading of it, and that is concerning. I have no issue with what the Minister said in her intervention, but there are still wider points. I appreciate that I may be in a minority of one, but that is still the position that I hold. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 70 repeals the vagrancy laws. Obviously, I support that. That is very much welcome.”
“I do not think that you break the grip of paramilitaries by creating offences so loose that they could catch people on the margins while the powerful leaders stay out of reach.”
“Under the participation offence, a person can be found guilty even though they did not know any of the people in the group, even though the crime that they were supposedly part of was never actually carried out and even where the things that they did were not, in themselves, criminal. The directing offence carries a sentence of up to 14 years. That is guilt by association. They are broad offences that hand sweeping discretion to the Police Service, which already over-polices the very communities that it claims to protect, and the Public Prosecution Service. Therefore, I have some concerns about that, to put it mildly. The problem of criminal gangs is real. There is no equivocation on that, but I think that the tool to deal with it is the wrong one.”
“I am happy to speak to the amendments in group 3. I think that there has been a bit of a misunderstanding in this debate about left ideology. I will maybe come to that if it is in line with the amendments. I would never dare stray from the topic of conversation. <BR /> <BR />Amendment Nos 45 to 48 deal with organised crime offences. We all know the damage that organised crime does in communities like mine. In west Belfast, paramilitary gangs run loan-sharking, drugs and extortion, and they use fear to control people. That harm has to be confronted head-on. There is no equivocation or disagreement around that, but I am not convinced that the amendments are the way to do that, as I will outline. <BR /> <BR />I am happy to be corrected through interventions, but my reading of the amendments is that they are drawn very widely.”
“I appreciate the Member giving way. He has been kind with his time. Is he seriously going to vote on the amendment based on what supposedly left-wing comedians in Britain do or say? If that really is his assertion, it is a pretty strange perspective to take on why he will vote a certain way on an amendment.”
“I consider myself to be part of the left-wing family and come from that perspective. Can the Member give an example of left-wing circles and groups mocking the Christian faith? That is new to me and will be new to many who describe themselves as left wing. It is a bizarre comment. Thank you.”
“I appreciate the Member's giving way. It would not be right to tar all religions, preachers or imams with the same brush, but does he have examples of imams or people of Islamic faith being engaged in hateful preaching in a public space in the North any time recently?”
“I appreciate the Member's giving way and her amendment. Does she agree that there is a differentiation to be made between supporting her amendment to remove the offence of blasphemy, and the potential criminal action that comes from it, and defining religious freedom? While I am not religious myself, I believe that people should have the right to practise religion. Does she agree that those are two different and separate issues?”
“It is the view of many people that developer contributions should be compulsory. If they are voluntary, they will be as much use as a chocolate teapot. Will the Minister indicate whether she is looking at implementing a system of increased fines for organisations that are polluting the lough, including any work with the AERA Minister to tackle those businesses, especially if they are agribusinesses, that are polluting the lough? Is there any work being done on increasing fines for those businesses?”
“The system that denies jobs, housing, hope and investment to the people of the Shankill and the Falls is the enemy, and its biggest defenders in this place are often the unionist parties. I condemn and stand against the racist violence. I welcome everybody who comes here, be they migrant, Muslim or anything else. They are welcome on these shores, they contribute to society, and they are very much part of its fabric.”
“<BR /> <BR />The fire is, unfortunately, not an isolated event; it is the latest in a series. The Assembly cannot ignore the fire in the Shankill or any of those other events. Unfortunately, racist hate crime in the North has reached record levels. Four race hate crimes are reported to the police every day. Racist violence is spiralling out of control. Just a few days ago, the Assembly heard that migrant people are stockpiling food because they fear another summer of pogroms and racist violence. What does that say about this society and where it is going? <BR /> <BR />I represent West Belfast, including the Shankill. The man who was trying to open the shop is not the enemy of the people of the Shankill or anywhere else, be they Protestant, Catholic or neither.”
“Today, I say these words to that man and his family: you are welcome here; you are part of the community; and this Chamber values your input in Belfast and beyond. <BR /> <BR />It has to be said that, unfortunately, the fire did not come from nowhere. For weeks, poison was pumped out online, with cowards filming videos in which they sneered at so-called "foreign food" and warned that there would be an influx of people. There were attempts to intimidate the family before the shop even opened. Incitement came first, and arson followed. Guilt for the crime is shared by those who struck the match and those who stoked the hatred. A special mention must go to TUV councillor Ron McDowell, who repeated great replacement theory nonsense that a shop would change the character of the area.”
“I thank the Speaker's Office for selecting this important Matter of the Day. <BR /> <BR />In the early hours of Saturday morning, a former gospel hall on the Shankill Road was burned to the ground by a fire that was deliberately set. The building had been bought by a family who intended to open a food shop and bring a much-needed service to the people of the Shankill. The incident is being investigated as a racially motivated hate crime. The man at the centre of the tragic incident has lived, worked and contributed here for almost 20 years. He put his life's savings into the building that went up in flames, and Belfast City Council and the Executive should step in and support him financially at this time.”
“I appreciate the Minister's giving way. Does she agree that the amendment is not about changing the national security determination but about notifying an individual when it changes, and that, if doing so is not within the Assembly's competence and we cannot make a simple amendment in that regard, it raises massive questions about how far policing and justice are devolved?”
“There is an opportunity to put data transparency and accountability in the Bill rather than wait years — that is my concern — for the PACE codes of practice to be updated, if they eventually are at all. People who agree with and stand by those principles should vote for the amendment. <BR /> <BR />Regarding the possibility of legislative incompetence, I dispute the Minister's assertion that it is not competent. The amendment is about the responsible officer providing written notice when a national security determination status changes. It is not about changing that status or interfering with reserved matters. It is about responding to changes in status with relevant written information. That is what is stated in the amendment, and I urge Members to back that amendment.”
“That is your opinion. That is fair enough, but there is a”
“I appreciate that, Minister, but I say, respectfully, that it is not the Minister's role to say whether amendments are legislatively competent or not. I think that this one is, and I would —.”