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 52 of 83.
“I find it ludicrous that the Executive have utterly failed to deliver on many commitments from previous agreements, including the Fresh Start Agreement and New Decade, New Approach, yet the Minister took those agreements as sufficient reason not to implement a law that was passed six years ago because the Executive apparently changed their mind. To be honest, I have more sympathy with her explanation that there was little time to implement the law, but that almost becomes a moot point when she, in her own words, said that the commitment to changing the process in closed-door Executive deals was a reason to delay implementation. What will happen if the Bill falls? Would she finally implement the 2015 measures?”
“Therefore, while we would have hoped for a more robust cause for direct committal in the event of a guilty plea in cases of serious sexual child abuse or other such crimes, we are not comfortable with the sweeping approach that has been set out by the Minister in the Bill, which will go far beyond that and remove any opportunity for a judge to review oral evidence before trial. <BR /> <BR />We are content to support the amendments, which will put in place what was agreed by the House in 2015. I find myself shocked that the Minister, whose party speaks, often loudly, about transparency, considers it acceptable that a democratic decision of the House would not be implemented because of any report, no matter how serious, or because of the will of the five-party Executive without a vote.”
“A balance can be struck between ensuring that victims and witnesses are not made unnecessarily to testify more than once and not endure a prolonged journey through the justice system while, at the same time, ensuring the right to fair process for a defendant. I am concerned that there were far too few references to the latter in the Committee discussions or documents from the Minister that I saw relating to the Bill. There is also far too little evidence that the measures in the Bill would shorten the process for victims.”
“<BR /> <BR />In that sense, I share some of the concerns that were raised by the CAJ in response to a discussion report on the reform of the committal process. It stated:”
“We have great sympathy for and solidarity with victims, particularly those of traumatising crimes, such as those of a serious sexual or abusive nature, who are made to wait unacceptable lengths of time to get verdicts. From the testimony of such victims, it is clear that that wait can be traumatising, as can be having to give testimony more than once. As other Members said, Gillen outlined in his report that we must deal with those cases more appropriately and that victims of and, indeed, witnesses to such crimes should not have to give testimony numerous times. We must ensure, however, that following Mr Gillen's advice for improving the system for victims does not encroach on the right to a fair trial and a fair process.”
“Thank you. It is just for the debate. It is not for any other reason, Mr Deputy Speaker”
“Is it any wonder that he tried to rush this through today without any scrutiny. <BR /> <BR />I will vote against the Second Stage of the Bill if my vote is counted today.”
“I cannot in good conscience rubber-stamp legislation that has been rushed through with such a laissez-faire attitude, and nor can I in good conscience vote against the interests of those running small businesses who have been in contact with me throughout the pandemic, who did not receive enough support, who are still suffering financially and who are in places having to work through this pandemic, while the Executive have abandoned the basic principles of social distancing and track and trace in order to keep themselves out of poverty and their small businesses alive. <BR /> <BR />The Minister has not bothered to address or consult them about the Bill. He has shown utter disrespect to those who were impacted by the pandemic and the Executive's disastrous approach to it.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is impossible for me or other MLAs who are not in the Executive or on the Finance Committee to get the full details behind this scandal. That a journalist, through a whistle-blower, has provided the most clarifying information to me and the public is a shameful indictment of the Minister and his Department's role in this.”
“<BR /> <BR />If the Minister believes that those who received relief during the pandemic should pay more through their business rates, he should write it into legislation and bring it to the House. However, that is not what happened here. In response to his Department's mistake, the Minister is attempting to shift blame elsewhere. It is shamefully similar to the Executive's approach to the pandemic since March 2020 and is symptomatic of the mantra that it is one law for the politicians and another for everybody else. The fact that the pandemic cannot be taken into consideration with rates valuation is not only absurd but totally unfair. Not all businesses were supported, and some that were supported were supported more than others.”
“It is crude in the extreme to claim that MLAs who do not go along with this get-out clause for the Minister will be responsible for a £255 million loss to the public purse, or whatever the amount being quoted, or that small businesses that take up their right of appeal will be responsible for the loss of £255 million to the public purse. To be clear, the fault for this latest financial scandal is with the Minister and his Department for apparently failing to take seriously the legal advice to make an alteration in the rates because of the COVID pandemic. Any attempt to blame those who had no idea that they may have been wrongly charged and who, in many cases, suffered through the pandemic is not only crude but shameful.”
“I cannot go along with that, my party cannot go along with that and I do not think that anyone else should go along with that. Nor are we happy to go along with the Minister's apparent assertion that because businesses got some support during the pandemic, he and his Department are within their rights to cut off the appeals process for them. What precedent does that set? <BR /> <BR />From yearly Budgets to COVID regulations, Stormont's record on democratic scrutiny is abysmal, but this latest effort from the Minister takes the biscuit.”
“I would like an answer to that when the Ministers sums up, because I find it alarming that, in a recent newspaper article, a departmental whistle-blower has claimed that the legislation is:”
“I am deeply concerned about this legislation and what it says about how the Executive dealt with the beginning of the pandemic and how they intend to resolve an issue that could cost hundreds of millions of pounds. All the while, this is coming from an Executive that already have, to put it mildly, a questionable record in wasting public money. <BR /> <BR />Another MLA has, rightly, asked two important questions: what did the Minister know about the situation and when did he know about it? I will add one more: will he verify the whistle-blower's account, which was that his Department received and ignored legal advice that could have avoided the situation? Does he accept or deny that?”
“<BR /> <BR />Unfortunately, we are almost two years into the pandemic, two years during which the Department could have consulted and acted on the legislation that is being debated today. The approach of using accelerated passage smacks of the elite arrogance that dominates Westminster: "We know best, and the plebs should just be quiet". I pay tribute to the journalism, particularly that of Sam McBride, that exposed the Bill and the proposed use of accelerated passage. It seems that, when he criticised the party opposite, he was favoured; now that he has criticised a Sinn Féin Minister, he may have fallen out of favour. I say to him that he should keep up his scrutiny. He did an important piece of journalism for me and other MLAs. I will vote against the accelerated passage procedure.”
“Throughout the pandemic, I have said that the Executive have shown contempt and disdain for the normal practices of accountability, scrutiny and allowing MLAs who are not on the Executive to look at, scrutinise and suggest amendments or different paths to the approaches taken by Ministers, including on legislation. Today is another example of that approach. Legislation that has not been consulted on and that, frankly, most people outside this Building did not even know was being discussed, never mind proposed to become law, is to be rushed through by accelerated passage. That is completely unacceptable. The argument that we are in unprecedented times cannot be used as an eternal excuse by Ministers to gut democracy and cut out important legislative stages.”
“The Bill is, obviously, clear in stating that it prevents the Department, health and social care trusts and other health service bodies from imposing charges for car parking by workers, patients and visitors to hospitals. Does the Member know whether any private organisations are imposing charges at car parks in any health service facilities across the North? If so, would that be allowed to continue if the Bill were passed? I would appreciate an answer on that, if not today then maybe in writing.”
“For those who can afford to pay it, it may seem like a small burden, but, for many who are looking down the barrel of one of the hardest winters in years, it is a financial burden that they should not have to face. I support the Bill; it would put that right. Moreover, we would like to see public transport for hospital workers being written in to law instead of being offered temporarily. As Members have said, many healthcare staff cannot travel to work via public transport, which is a failing of the Executive, not those workers. Workers who are able to use public transport should be encouraged to make that choice. <BR /> <BR />I have a final question for the Member who is sponsoring the legislation.”
“Moreover, with fuel price hikes and absolutely no action from the Executive to protect people, thousands on low pay in our health service will be hit hard. Many of those workers rely on the welfare system when they should not have to. Every time the welfare system is cut back by the Tories or the Executive, those workers suffer again. That constitutes a litany of attacks on health workers, and those on the lowest pay will be the hardest hit. It is an added affront that they are also expected to pay into NHS car parks just to get into work. This — clear and simple — is a cut against wages. Of course, it is also an unnecessary burden for those who are ill or visiting sick relatives.”
“Again, the Minister should never have gone along with that and the disrespect that it represents. I recently tabled a proposal to the Health Committee to reject that offer in favour of a better one. Shamefully, that proposal did not get the support of other parties. <BR /> <BR />From A&E to ICU to GP offices and beyond, our health staff work under immense pressure. The pandemic has intensified that pressure, but underfunding, low pay, privatisation and a failure to bolster staffing levels over 10 years are at the heart of the conditions that our health workers face. In essence, the neoliberal agenda at Stormont and across the water at Westminster means that the Executive spend £1 million per day on PFI and public-private partnership (PPP) schemes.”
“I say "Fáilte romhat" to the Member. I know that she has been here for a while, but I have not been in direct debate with her. I wish her well in her role as an MLA. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the legislation. We in People Before Profit have been calling for this since before the pandemic. With the added toll on health workers during the pandemic, however, there is even more reason to remove hospital car parking charges. The Minister should never have attempted to reintroduce those charges, especially not before the pandemic was over. I hope that we can see them scrapped for good. <BR /> <BR />I will put car parking charges in the wider context. Health workers and their unions are demanding a fair pay offer. What they have been offered is, effectively, a slap in the face after the work that they have done over the past two years.”
“Does the Member share my concern about reports released today that nurses and healthcare workers may be leaving the NHS and going to the private sector because the pay is significantly higher there than it is in National Health Service trusts. Is he concerned about that issue too?”
“<BR /> <BR />Much as I and my party have issues with the COVID certificate passport scheme, people who link it to the attempted genocide and real oppression faced by Jewish people in the 1930s and '40s in Germany are not only wrong but insulting and offensive and face falling into the dangerous, deadly trap of the far right, which is pushing some of this anti-vax, anti-Semitic stuff. We have no truck whatever with that approach.”
“Discarding social distancing is dangerous and a bad idea. Once it is legislated for, it will be difficult to go back on and will only add to people's growing confusion about and distrust in Stormont's approach. I ask the big parties to reconsider that approach. <BR /> <BR />The pattern is the same as the one we saw with the relaxations last July and last Christmas. There is no democratic decision-making process. Instead of decisions based purely on the science, we get the Executive wrangling behind closed doors and compromises that leave us with cases surging all over again. How long are people expected to accept that?”
“On too many occasions, they have thrown small businesses and workers under the bus, and now they are creating a scenario where people may be crammed into indoor spaces in a dangerous way. We now find ourselves in a situation where the Executive will, presumably, bring forward a vaccine passport scheme to allow people to enter venues while all social-distancing measures inside those venues are discarded. I remind people that vaccination is not a magic bullet for dealing with the virus indoors this winter. Let us remember that, in recent weeks, we saw that up to 170 COVID cases were linked to an indoor venue in County Antrim at a teen disco. That event happened after the retrospective regulations were brought in. In the same week, the Executive want us to retrospectively approve that decision.”
“As WHO medical experts realise, vaccination should always be used in a persuasive way alongside other measures to track, trace and reduce the spread of the virus. To be clear, I am an enthusiastic supporter of vaccines, although I do not believe that they should be mandatory or forced on people. Vaccination should be used alongside the health advice that has worked so far: social distancing; mask wearing; ventilation of workplaces; and working from home where possible. <BR /> <BR />The Executive need to get back to basics and support businesses and workers to protect themselves from the virus, especially as we peer into a winter that will be extremely difficult for our hospitals. The problem is that the Executive have too often been doing the opposite.”
“I want to talk specifically about the amendment (No. 18) regulations. I do not believe that now is the time to end all social distancing in hospitality venues. I have concerns about how that might impact on staff and service users alike. Protecting workers is key for me. I am concerned that, over the next month, hospitality workers will bear the brunt of another failed COVID strategy that is being embarked on by the Executive. Some 1,400 new cases and 13 deaths have been recorded this week alone. I sympathise with all the people affected. <BR /> <BR />We also have a situation where the Executive are throwing away the very basics of social distancing and are, presumably, counting on the vaccine strategy to work.”
“Stand by your staff, and they will stand by you. Solidarity for the workers.”
“I encourage every student to support the strike and to support the UCU workers who are taking action.”
“The casualisation of staff has seen a huge impact, in the first instance on staff, but also on the form of teaching and support that students receive from staff who are in full-time employment and have fixed contracts, often overworked and doing the work of several people. There are also people working for below the minimum wage in universities when their full labour time is calculated, whilst vice chancellors earn close to a quarter of a million pounds. That is not saddening; it is revolting and it turns the stomach. When universities like Queen's University have some £647 million in reserves, it is even more sickening that it is preaching frugality to its workers who keep the place running. This week, there is a referendum in Queen's to support the strike action.”
“<BR /> <BR />Sean O'Connell, a lecturer at Queen's, put it well recently when he said:”
“In addition, they are taking a blow against the idea of students as consumers and the full-scale marketisation of our education system, where the price of everything and the value of nothing are measured, where financial barriers are repeatedly erected for students and where students leave university with a mountain of debt. <BR /> <BR />As with every strike, there have been attempts to pit groups of workers or people against each other. Some are trying to suggest that the experiences of students, lecturers and education workers are different and unconnected. The threat, if you will, to students does not come from striking workers: those are the people who provide education on a daily basis and even did so during a pandemic, putting themselves in harm's way when summoned back to work when the virus was still circulating.”
“It is fighting to do away with a fixation on zero-hours contracts, which sees 3,500 staff in universities and colleges employed via them. It is highlighting the mental health impacts of increased workloads; 86% of staff have been referred for mental health support due to the effects of the their workloads. It is fighting against pay discrimination, which sees women, disabled people and black and Asian workers all being paid substantially less than their colleagues. <BR /> <BR />Those issues are not the only ones that those workers are fighting for.”
“I offer my full solidarity to the lecturers, researchers, PGCE students and all workers who are members of the University and College Union (UCU) and who will take strike action next month to stand up not only for themselves but for our entire education system, which is often bragged about in the House. I offer my solidarity and that of my party to those workers; I will be proud to stand with them on the picket line again, as I have done over the years. <BR /> <BR />The UCU will strike as part of its Our Four Fights campaign. Every one of those issues is worthy, in and of itself, of strike action and dedicated focus. The union is fighting against pay inequality. There has been a drop of over 17% in salaries since 2009, when measured against inflation.”
“The situation faced by those who work in and rely on EDs is stark and concerning. I am concerned that we will keep on doing what has been done and get the same results again. <BR /> <BR />What proportion of the new money that the Minister announced is being spent on the private sector, private organisations and private healthcare?”
“I do not know what the Member is shouting, but let me finish. <BR /> <BR />We need to have a just transition away from those types of energy resources. Fossil fuels burn the planet, and we know that they also burn a hole in people's pockets.”
“The Member wants a Russian history lesson. Russia is certainly not communist or socialist. It is a capitalist country, just like Britain and all those others. The DUP has a weird obsession with Russia and China, but I do not have time to dissect that today. Russia is very much a capitalist country. Capitalism is still your party's philosophy, which is strange, given that it cannot even protect people during a pandemic, never mind when prices shoot up.”
“Therefore, in the short term, we need to see those companies taken into public ownership to ensure that profiteering does not occur and that people are not subject to the whims and decisions of shareholders, chief executives and profiteers.”
“Stormont needs to call on Westminster to implement a windfall tax on the profits made by energy companies this year and put that towards developing a green economy and a just transition. <BR /> <BR />Global causes can be used as an excuse, but the latest increase shows, once again, how unreliable the market is. In recent years, there has been an idea that more competition needs to be injected into the market. However, in the present crisis, the UK Government's preferred option is to let smaller energy companies fail and to persuade larger energy companies to take on the customers of their former rivals with the help of state-backed loans. In practice, that proves that competition is built on fantasy.”
“We simply cannot expect rising energy costs to be passed on to the public at a time of widespread hardship while energy companies are set to make millions in profits. Those with the deepest pockets should pay. <BR /> <BR />An emergency fuel poverty fund should be implemented. Unregulated energy companies need to commit to donating profits to an emergency fuel poverty fund, as suggested by some here, the Fuel Poverty Coalition and the Utility Regulator. Emergency financial support needs to be implemented, and additional funding needs to be directed towards increasing the winter fuel payment, the cold weather payment, the warm homes scheme and so on, as suggested by NEA and the Nevin Economic Research Institute. <BR /> <BR />A windfall tax needs to be implemented.”
“<BR /> <BR />If the Executive cannot implement protection to prevent people being cold this winter, most people will quite rightly ask, "What are their priorities? What are they at?". A rapid and widespread winter fuel poverty scheme needs to be implemented urgently. Where is the emergency meeting of the Executive on that issue? Where is the fuel poverty strategy? There has been some talk about global causes, but there are some measures that the Executive can implement to protect people, such as a price cap. <BR /> <BR />The Utility Regulator and the Department for the Economy need to enforce a stop on unregulated energy companies profiting on the back of these price hikes, especially during such an unprecedented period.”
“That figure will shoot up again even further. <BR /> <BR />As a bare minimum, the Executive need to ensure that people are protected this winter. They need to ensure that a protective financial blanket is put around people to make sure that they are not thrown to the wolves. People may ask, "How should that be paid for?". That is a fair question. However, to be honest, organisations that have made huge profits on the back of people should not be subsidised. The profits of those organisations should be tackled and the money used to introduce a payment scheme. I have already asked what powers Stormont has to do that, and some may say that they are limited. However, Stormont has power over welfare, so protection payments need to be put in place.”
“I support the motion. First, the increases are an absolute disgrace. I am very concerned about how they will impact on people in my constituency and beyond, such as pensioners; people in work; those who face further pay freezes; people on benefits, including legacy benefits; and people who will be affected by the withdrawal of the universal credit uplift. The increases will have a real, negative impact on those people's lives. <BR /> <BR />This year, people are paying £1,000 more for energy than last year. The cost of heating a home and being able to wash has shot up dramatically, but pay and benefits have not; they have gone in the opposite direction. I am extremely worried about how people will get by this winter. This is an unprecedented increase and crisis, and fuel poverty already impacts on 42% of households.”
“Despite the fact that hospitality workers are integral to the venues operating, I am concerned that, once again, decisions are being made without any consideration about how front-line workers will be impacted by them. <BR /> <BR />I am worried about the winter. I am also concerned about the spread in cases not just among the elderly and vulnerable but in people across the community, the unvaccinated and those facing the possibility of long COVID.”
“<BR /> <BR />I turn to the regulations. I have raised concerns in Committee about evidence not being forthcoming to guide the lifting of regulations, especially those pertaining to the removal of social-distancing requirements at performance venues. I am concerned that there has been a lack of projected modelling of what the cases will be or what will happen if regulation x or y is lifted. We are met with daily warnings about the health service reaching crisis point this winter, so I am concerned that there is a plan to plough ahead without knowing about or having some baseline as to what the cases will be if those decisions are made and regulations are lifted. <BR /> <BR />I do not believe that the regulation allowing food ordering has been put through rigorous enough checks.”
“I start by expressing my sympathies to the families of everyone who has passed away from COVID. Unfortunately, thousands of people have died, including my grandmother Claire, who, sadly, died last week. Our nanny, as we knew her, was in hospital awaiting a care package. She was waiting for a long time, and, unfortunately, picked up COVID. She was transferred to the Mater and died later. The fact that our health and care services and systems are overstretched meant that communication broke down or did not happen. I do not for a second blame the health workers; I blame an underfunded system and am concerned that others will be impacted by that, as our grandmother was. My family and I thank the staff in the COVID centre and the Mater who cared for her. I am worried about how the winter will be for many people.”
“Does the Minister agree with unions such as Unite that these issues are some 20 years in the making and that they are primarily down to the gruelling conditions faced by workers who literally do not have a pot to pee in? Will the Minister's Department agree to look at the HGV drivers' manifesto that Unite has published to see about implementing its recommendations?”
“It is not cynical to highlight the fact that people want investment in welfare protection and health. It is cynical to say otherwise. <BR /> <BR />Minister, given that the Executive have failed to cushion people from the brutal cut in universal credit, what is your message to the hundreds of thousands of people who will struggle this winter?”
“Working-class people on the Shankill Road, in Tiger's Bay and in every other working-class area in our constituencies deserve much better.”
“<BR /> <BR />I want to talk briefly about the hypocrisy of those who are waging a somewhat pathetic fight over the First Minister position. The truth is that the First Minister and deputy First Minister positions have no real legal difference. The DUP has been happy to share power with Sinn Féin for years while implementing austerity with them as partners in government. Now, however, faced with a sustained crisis in unionism, they revert to what they know best: beating the communal drum and heightening tensions. They have been doing it for months, and much of the commentary from the DUP and some in the UUP about the First Minister position is simply another example of the chronic opportunism and insecurity that is a result of the crisis facing unionism.”