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 56 of 83.
“Can the Minister outline what consideration he or the working group that he referred to has given to the conditions faced by domiciliary care workers, who often have to pay their own mileage or travel time when moving between people who they care for? There is no care system without care workers. Can the Minister also confirm that there were fewer than 50 responses to the consultation in 2017?”
“We therefore need to see a COVID wealth tax and public provision of social care to support people who are in need and who should not be forced to pay for those services if they cannot afford to.”
“<BR /> <BR />When talking about public provision of services and care in particular, people always say, "How can the state afford it? How can it provide for it?". As I have said categorically throughout the COVID pandemic, we need to see a COVID wealth tax implemented. I have raised that point many times. If you tax the households earning over £1 million by an extra 1%, you can bring in £260 billion over five years. The IMF is even talking about a wealth tax. We have already heard and will hear again in the House about our lack of tax-raising powers, but that did not stop parties here for the best part of 10 years clamouring and begging for corporation tax to be reduced.”
“As we were told by Bevan and others, the NHS is about providing support from the cradle to the grave, but, sadly, when people reach older age, they are failed and let down by the state and the system. The reality is that the problem has been allowed to fester over many years, and the private sector has been facilitated and constantly allowed to creep into providing public services. <BR /> <BR />Why did the Health Minister not make a statement to the House on the recent changes that he implemented? Some could be cynical and say that there is a plan to implement what Naomi Klein called the "shock doctrine", where a time of great political crisis, when people's attention is focused elsewhere, is used to implement changes that they are opposed to.”
“As we have heard, there has been a renewed conversation about social care and how it is funded and provided to elderly people and others who need assistance in our society. The problem, however, is that all the approaches and debates are based and focused on the premise that the state should play a minimal role in the provision and cost of care. I say categorically that people should be receiving care, including residential care, from the state, with the NHS and its trusts directly providing and paying for it, but people are being forced to pay for it themselves. It is shocking that people who worked and paid taxes and National Insurance all their life are effectively being failed by the state when it comes to the provision of care towards the end of their life.”
“People still do not know that those fees are illegal and that they should not be charged them at all. The Minister said that she is working on that. I would like to hear the early plans for tackling it and what she is considering, even though there has been no concrete proposal so far.”
“I hope that this Bill is not a missed opportunity to tackle the issue of exploitative rent by controlling that practice. One way to do it would be for the Minister and her Department to explore the option of, and implement, a rent cap on private landlords, forcing them to charge similar rates to those operating best practice in social housing, such as the Housing Executive. I ask the Minister whether she and her Department have explored that issue. This legislation is clearly at a relatively early stage, but that type of issue needs to be addressed in the Bill. Renters and their rights generally need to be supported. I look forward to scrutinising the Bill. <BR /> <BR />Finally, I concur with two Members — I think that it was Ms Armstrong and Ms Bailey — about letting fees.”
“While that would obviously be better than the current arrangement, in which there is essentially no regulation whatsoever, it is unlikely to solve the problem, because each landlord would still be able to implement rent increases annually, none of which will need to be tied to inflation or be in line with lower rents that exist elsewhere, such as in social housing. Instead, it is likely that landlords will continue to cite market pressures in order to raise the rent in a more structured and planned way, bringing little long-term or lasting reprieve for those who are struggling to make their payments as it is. <BR /> <BR />I raise this issue now because I fear that it is where the Bill may, and indeed already appears to, fall significantly short.”
“<BR /> <BR />Perhaps the most talked-about element of the Bill will be clause 7, which relates to restrictions on rent increases. The private rental sector is notable for increasingly exploitative rents. Across the city, rent increases have been a serious problem over the past decade, especially since the housing crisis of 2008. During the pandemic, rent has shot up when, in many cases, wages have been cut. <BR /> <BR />It is outrageous that, as things stand, landlords can essentially increase rent on a whim, and there is little protection for tenants and little regulation from government. This Bill aims to resolve that by allowing rent increases to be implemented only 12 months after a tenancy has been signed or in the 12 months after a previous increase has been implemented.”
“<BR /> <BR />I have witnessed many constituents being forced out in that manner over the years in circumstances that, I believe, ought to be illegal, never mind the morality of it. Therefore, I welcome the move to extend the period to enforce eight weeks after one year, 12 weeks after two years and 16 weeks after 10 years. That said, whether that is long enough is an open question. I note that the early stages of consultation on the Bill — Ms Armstrong talked about it — were notable for the lack of engagement with tenants. I look forward to further engagement in that area during the Committee process. <BR /> <BR />The move around energy efficiency is, obviously, welcome, and provisions to compel landlords to take their responsibilities seriously around smoke, fire and carbon monoxide threats are also welcome.”
“The rights of property owners and landlords are favoured instead. That situation is in urgent need of reform, and, therefore, I welcome the opportunity to do that through the Bill. It is, obviously, still in its early stages, so I will offer some indicative thoughts today. <BR /> <BR />Much of the Bill seems very welcome, but it remains to be seen whether it goes far enough, and even the Minister alluded to that. The move to strengthen tenants' rights with regard to notice to quit is welcome. It is simply outrageous that people can build homes for themselves for years, even decades, only to be given four weeks' notice from a landlord to move out, upturning their home and the lives that they have built in them in the process.”
“<BR /> <BR />As others have indicated, we are talking about tens of thousands of people here, accounting for significant housing stock right across the North — tens of thousands of people who have children and many of whom are young single parents or couples. There are thousands more older households, including many retired pensioners as well as over 15,000 people who are permanently sick or disabled or are caring for a loved one. Practically half of all private tenants receive some form of state financial support, either through housing benefit or universal credit, to help them with the cost of rent. That acts as a huge state subsidy for exploitative landlords, and there is a lack of monitoring of their actions and activity. Certainly, not all landlords are bad, as people have stated today, but the system is stacked against tenants.”
“I thank the Minister for bringing the Bill forward. The housing crisis that racks our society should be at the top of the Executive's list of priorities. As a representative of West Belfast, which is a constituency that, unfortunately, often tops the charts in terms of poverty and housing stress, I deal daily with what I can only describe as horror stories when it comes to casework arising from housing issues. Others have stated that too. Central to that problem are often those tenants who are forced to live in an exploitative private rental sector and find themselves having to pay increasingly exorbitant rents for homes that offer little protection and little security.”
“Thank you for answering, Minister. The move may have been initiated by COVID, but it has caused inconvenience, disruption and barriers for people getting access to justice, particularly in Derry. I ask the Minister when the change will revert so that those court cases are heard in Derry. What measures has she taken and what measures will she take to make sure that people in Derry do not face any barriers to justice?”
“Neither the United States nor the UK has a God-given right to be the policeman of the world, overthrowing governments and states that they do not like. For now, Joe Biden has announced the end of operations across the world to remake other countries. I would like to believe that, but, frankly, I do not hold out much hope. The US has over 800 military bases across the globe, and it is constantly locking horns with China. If we are really to learn a lesson from 20 years, it should be that wars are a waste — a waste of lives, money and resources. Let us make this next decade one in which those banging the drum for war are reminded of the tragedy that war brings.”
“How else can you justify the mass bombings of weddings, towns and cities if you do not portray your victims as uncivilised? <BR /> <BR />Back in the early 2000s, I joined millions of people across the world and hundreds of thousands on this island to oppose the launching of the war on Iraq. That war was based on a pack of lies: no weapons of mass destruction were ever found. Sadly, the prediction that many made at the time that a war of this size and scale would beget more violence and terror has proven to be correct. ISIS and its offshoots did not exist in Iraq and other countries; the US and UK's actions created them. <BR /> <BR />The 20-year lesson from the war on terror should be that "liberal" or "humanitarian" intervention did not and cannot work.”
“Despite most of the attackers being Saudi, the focus right away for Bush and the warmongers was on Afghanistan and, eventually, Iraq. Incidentally, the US had opportunities to get access to bin Laden. It refused to accept or discuss them, opting instead to flex its muscles and revenge bomb the wrong people. The response from warmongers to brutal terrorism was to launch their own war on terror that brought misery, death, destruction and terror to many millions. It created a spiral of state surveillance, huge military spending and a politically racist system where people who were Muslim or deemed to be Muslim were treated with disdain, fear and suspicion. That was the logical outcome of a war on terror that needed to dehumanise the people whom it viewed as collateral damage to carry out its murder sprees.”
“Saturday marked 20 years since the tragedy of the 11 September Twin Towers attacks, in which almost 3,000 people lost their lives in an unspeakable tragedy. <BR /> <BR />My thoughts and sympathies are with all those who lost loved ones on that terrible day. The Twin Towers attacks is one of those moments that we all remember: we remember the events of that day and what happened in the years that followed. In response to a terrible tragedy in New York, the neocons and new Labour, with its many backers — including some in the House — set the Middle East ablaze and created many more 9/11s in Kabul, Kandahar, Baghdad and Basra. The families who lost loved ones in New York deserve justice for what happened on that day. The British and American establishments were never interested in justice for those people, however.”
“The list goes on and on. That is what we have come to expect from the Executive during the pandemic: pandemonium in our schools, care homes and hospitals while the main focus is put not on guaranteeing the safety of workers but on getting those workers into workplaces that may be unsafe. Some 18 months on, they still cannot get it right. I call on the Minister today to convene an emergency meeting of teachers, principals and their unions to hear the concerns and to pull out all the stops to address them head-on. Will the Minister, in her comeback today, commit to doing that? If so, how urgently will she do it?”
“<BR /> <BR />We should have taken our lead from the trade unions and representatives of the workers on the front line then and now, who are doing their best to protect not only their members but, crucially, children and their families. From speaking to staff, I know that the frustration is palpable. It really beggars belief that they were forced and told to do contact tracing. That speaks volumes about the Minister's view of the PHA as well. <BR /> <BR />There has been constant disruption to teaching; no practical support for ventilation, such as CO2 monitors or air filters; no clear instruction, leaving principals to make difficult decisions about isolation in individual schools; no contingency measures or planning for exams like the transfer test; and concerns about pay for substitute teachers who have to isolate.”
“One would think that efforts would have been made to ensure the safety of staff and children through clear guidance, as well as practical support such as rigorous moves to ensure ventilation. One would think that clear lines of communication between schools and health authorities would have been developed and that a robust form of track and trace and isolation regulations would have been developed by now. It is disappointing but, sadly, unsurprising that the current Education Minister has followed the practice of her predecessor and done very little in reality to address those serious concerns. It is, frankly, embarrassing that Executive colleagues are making a last-ditch effort to intervene following an outcry from teachers and their unions. It seems that the summer was definitely wasted in that regard.”
“I support the motion and thank the Member who proposed it. <BR /> <BR />Once again, schoolchildren, teachers, classroom assistants, school staff and parents have great cause to be concerned both about the COVID rates in the pandemic and government inaction; indeed, the COVID rates are startling, given how long ago the pandemic reached us. One study in recent weeks indicated that one in 40 people here might have COVID, and that was before the schools reopened. The way education and schools have been left is, frankly, more like a dog's dinner. One would think that, in that context, all efforts would have been made on behalf of and by the Education Minister and the wider Executive to anticipate the difficulties that are now mounting in schools.”
“Again I emphasise that those who were killed by paramilitaries will be negatively impacted by the Government's plans, which are not supported by the victims' groups that represent them. We need to see a process that offers a fair chance of justice to the families of every victim of the Troubles, rather than one that tries to bury their experiences and grief. <BR /> <BR />I resolutely oppose Boris Johnson's perverse, dangerous and reactionary plans. My solidarity goes out to every victim and to their families, who continue to fight for truth and justice against the many barriers and obstacles that are placed in their way.”
“Let us not forget the devastating role played by the Parachute Regiment on the Shankill Road in taking the lives of Ritchie McKinney and Robert Johnston, which is not often talked about. <BR /> <BR />We now know that the secret hand of the British state was knee-deep in violence during the Troubles. That was not just in the early years, when it openly gunned down peaceful civil rights protesters, but for decades through hidden and subterranean ways, including its dirty war and its collusion with paramilitaries through covert military intelligence groups such as the FRU and other intelligence agencies that worked inside paramilitary organisations and were responsible for the murders of many innocent people.”
“<BR /> <BR />Boris Johnson's plan to protect those who murdered in cold blood will protect his state and those who gave the orders, such as General Sir Michael Jackson, while the victims and their families, who paid the ultimate price for those actions, will be denied justice once again. The plans must be ardently opposed, because they are not supported by the vast majority of people locally and represent an assault on justice. Let us also be clear that it is not just one section of the community that has an interest in seeking truth and justice. When the state kills its citizens, it is in the interests of all communities to fight for truth and justice, whether those communities are Catholic, Protestant, Muslim or none of those.”
“Let us also be clear that they have been getting away with it in other parts of the world in more recent years in Baghdad, Basra, Fallujah and any other city where British military boots landed to carry out imperialist ventures. If the British Army's crimes in the North were tried before the courts, the image created by the British establishment of an army sent on a peacekeeping mission between warring tribes would be further shattered. It would call into question the entire institution of the British military, with far-reaching implications for the military and the so-called counter-insurgency expeditions across the world.”
“What the Boris Johnson Government are really interested in is avoiding a situation where the long list of military crimes of the state is aired before the world in a way that we saw at the Bloody Sunday and Ballymurphy inquests and in the case of Soldier F. <BR /> <BR />The British Empire, where the sun never set and the blood never dried, has a long history of violence across the world and has much to fear from having to own up to how much of that violence was sanctioned from the very top, rather than being the actions of a few rogue soldiers. When they got away with it in Ballymurphy, they knew that they could get away with it in Derry on Bloody Sunday, and they knew that they could get away with it in Springhill and Westrock a year later, as well as in New Lodge and many other places.”
“It is reprehensible and amounts to a retrospective licence to kill from a Government who care not one iota for the victims here who come from all communities and all deserve justice, whether they lost loved ones at the hands of the state or through paramilitary violence. <BR /> <BR />Despite innumerable platitudes from Boris and his cohorts about moving on, the reality is that the plan is designed to do anything but that. It is a scheme that provides no truth, justice or accountability for people who have lost loved ones. It is obvious that, on the one hand, Tories are playing to a specific pro-empire, right-wing voter base in trying to protect their soldiers, but, more crucially, on the other hand, they are trying to protect their own establishment and to exonerate it of its crimes in Ireland.”
“I thank the Members for tabling the motion. There should be no doubt that the British state was the main protagonist in fuelling violence and conflict in the North. That is evident when you look at the pattern of repression and violence that was meted out to a peaceful and democratic movement for civil rights and at the various abuses of power in the early 1970s and onwards, not least internment, collusion, torture and shoot to kill. The list goes on and on. The current Tory plans to impose a statute of limitations to cease prosecutions for incidents during the Troubles will slam the door on those who lost loved ones in terrible circumstances during the Troubles.”
“<BR /> <BR />There is one area of the Bill that gives me cause for concern: the inclusion of financial efficiency as a justification for integrated education. While we obviously support integrated education and hope to see it rolled out across the North, and, hopefully, expanded, with the Bill, if it goes forward, we disagree that that will come about only by closing or merging existing schools. We do not see school closures and integrated education as having the same aim. In attempting to improve education on the whole, integrated education is, obviously, only one step. Investment is another crucial step. My comments were brief, but I am happy to support the Bill.”
“<BR /> <BR />All children, regardless of religion or any other factor, should be entitled to the same standard of education in any school across the North. It is important that we recognise that there is a growing number of people who do not subscribe to any religion and for whom there is no option for secular or integrated education in their local area. While we would probably go further than the aims set out in the Bill, my party will support the progress of the Bill, because we agree with promoting and funding integrated education so that we can begin to end the outdated and divisive segregation of children and begin to educate them alongside their peers, regardless of background or religion.”
“<BR /> <BR />People Before Profit would prefer to see a wholly secular education system and the complete separation of any Church from the running of our schools. We have seen the impact of religious influence in schools, particularly when it comes to relationships and sexuality education, which leaves a lot to be desired in many schools. It is downright dysfunctional in others, where groups such as Precious Life are brought in, disgracefully, to teach children about abstinence because it chimes with the Christian ethos of the school. That is in no way to impinge on the rights of people to practise religion, or to end religious traditions being taught in an academic manner in schools — speaking to Mr Butler's point — but to say that education that is taught through the prism of religion should not be the standard.”
“<BR /> <BR />The implications of that are clear, and there is a detrimental impact on our ability to move on as a society while we continue to teach children, from the earliest possible age, that segregation and division are normal and that other children are inherently different to them, based on how their parents were raised or where they live. It is incredible that that continues in 2021, and, frankly, both sides of the Chamber foster blame for that, whether that is by opposing an end to segregated education or maintaining it by default. It is important to note that, despite claims to the contrary about a shared future, for years, the two major blocks of nationalism and unionism have much to gain from communalism and division. That is about educating people separately as well.”
“I welcome the Bill. I thank the Member for bringing it to the House, and for the work that she has done on it. The need for the Bill speaks for itself. Recently, my community experienced sectarian riots at interfaces that were fuelled by divisive politics from the very top. It is the same kind of politics that has maintained the segregated education that divides children along religious or communal lines, into one camp or the other, before they can understand what camp they are in, or supposed to be in, and why.”
“I am tempted to say that it is all kicking off on the last day of school, but I will not use that terrible joke.”
“It was important to put those matters on the record even if I cannot hear the responses to them.”
“If the Department and the wider Executive take their duty to workers, communities and the environment seriously, that is the kind of plan that they should or would be putting in place, instead of focusing exclusively or narrowly on solutions that do not address the environmental impact of cars, the rising costs to customers and, most importantly, the ridiculous outgoings that workers are expected to fork out to drive for a living. Ultimately, that is the kind of plan that we need to see being implemented through the prism of a just transition that puts workers at the centre. <BR /> <BR />I apologise to the House: I have to run out to the front steps for a protest. I will not be able to hear the comments of the Minister or the Chair, but I will be able to look back at them.”
“By focusing on raised fares instead, the root of the issue is left untouched, and large depots will continue to make a killing at the expense of drivers and those who have to use private taxis because they have a disability or are elderly. Those customers face the harshest impacts of fare rises and, in some cases, will be priced out of using taxis entirely. <BR /> <BR />Ultimately, the solution is to have either a state-run or cooperative worker-run taxi fleet that pays drivers a fair wage, guarantees better conditions by capping outgoings and provides a service that is not too costly for some and that is run in an eco-friendly manner, with electric cars and the like.”
“<BR /> <BR />While I agree that having a transparent and capped fare structure is paramount to driver and customer trust, my party does not think that looking at taxi fares alone will ultimately provide the solution to the precarity of taxi drivers or having fewer drivers in cars, especially when that solution will presumably involve fares being increased. The main problem that needs to be addressed is the massive outgoings and overheads that have to be paid out in depot fees, insurance and other charges. The Assembly would do better to intervene to cap those costs in order to ensure that drivers can take home a fair wage for their work.”
“The plight of taxi drivers during the pandemic was sorely underestimated. Frankly, the way in which they were treated as far as receiving financial assistance is concerned was unacceptable for too long, and it was due only to their determination and protest that they were able to access help eventually. The decline in drivers is less of a concern for the economy getting back on its feet and more for the workers who were overlooked. Even now, some — many — are struggling to get into work because of overheads or do not see the job that they held as feasible or possible to maintain.”
“Hopefully, that issue and others can be raised on the Floor if they are not picked as Matters of the Day. I think that Standing Orders allow for that. I am happy to support the motion.”
“There is quite a tight time frame unless you are up here early on Monday mornings, which I usually am after pedalling up the hill. The 9.30 am deadline is tight. Things can happen after 9.30 am on a Monday, and, to all intents and purposes, people cannot really address those issues on the Floor. <BR /> <BR />Also, unfortunately, the smaller parties do not always get the chance to speak in the Chamber, although recent changes are obviously welcome. For those matters, the change provides some flexibility. I am happy to be corrected by the Chair or Deputy Chair of the Committee — I think that she is the Chair — but, last week, Mr Muir submitted a Matter of the Day on LGBT rights in Hungary. There were six or seven other requests for Matters of the Day, and, if I remember correctly, only one was picked.”
“I support the motion and the change to Standing Orders. Broadly, anything that allows for a bit more flexibility in discussion and debate in this place is a good thing. Sometimes — many times — this place does not really reflect what is going on or what people are viewing or seeing or being motivated or angered by in the outside world. I suspect that the Matters of the Day probably will not change, and there will still be many requests for those. <BR /> <BR />I know that Mr O'Dowd is not speaking as a member of the Business Committee, but I would certainly be in favour of both plenary days having time — we are talking about only half an hour — for Members' statements to be made and heard. <BR /> <BR />As I said, Matter of the Day requests will still exist, but the criteria will be stricter.”
“<BR /> <BR />There have been recent reports about the system failing people with disabilities. I hope that we will not continue to fail victims and survivors and that, by supporting the motion and a review, those problems will be resolved.”
“There should be a dedicated phone line, or a letter should automatically be issued so that people know that their information has been received. Survivors and victims have said to me repeatedly that there should be flexibility in how the scheme and payments are administered. There is also the question of the discrepancy in payments. Who can say that the abuse that one person suffered is less than that suffered by someone else? I cannot. Nobody in the Chamber can, or would. With prosecutions and legal proceedings against those involved in the abuse being unlikely, if not impossible, given the timescale of events, the only real barometer that people have of receiving recognition for their abuse is the payments that are made. The discrepancy in the rates being paid to different people is an important point.”
“They have said that it is a very legalistic and complicated process. As I understand it, people, effectively, need a solicitor to navigate the scheme. Although that is possibly good advice and practice, it is not something that everybody has access to or feels comfortable with. There are also other problems, as people have mentioned. The fact that the redress scheme takes, as I understand it, 16 weeks to complete suggests that a lot of work needs to be done to speed up the process. Whether it is employing more staff or putting resources in place, whatever needs to be done should be done immediately to speed up the process and stop unnecessary delays. <BR /> <BR />There should be some form of recognition — I think that Ms Bradshaw touched on this — when an application or information is supplied.”
“I pay tribute to all the victims and survivors who have battled unsurmountable odds and overcome hurdles and obstacles to finally get some recognition of the fact that they have been failed and that they were abused by institutions under the nose of the state, if not directly by it. The process to get some recognition was long, arduous and unimaginably traumatic for the people who were failed repeatedly. Although the redress board scheme was not, and is not, perfect, it was because of the grit and determination of those survivors and victims and their families, who campaigned and fought to get a scheme over the line, that this scheme was developed in the first place. <BR /> <BR />People have raised with me similar issues to those raised with the Chair and other members about the scheme and how it operates.”
“I thank the Member for submitting the question, and I thank the Minister for her solidarity with the Bloody Sunday families. Does the Minister agree that in no other case would we have a situation where somebody who has admitted to a serious crime — the cold-blooded killing of civilians, no less — which Soldier F has done, would, effectively, get away without a prosecution case proceeding against them? Does she also agree that that awful decision shows how inaccurate the claims are of a two-tier justice system stacked against soldiers and state forces?”
“I absolutely agree with that. When the policy was developed, what consideration was given to no longer awarding government contracts to organisations such as Capita? Capita has been found guilty of systemic maladministration, and many people regard it as having no social value. This policy seems to be a contradiction at a time when many millions are being funnelled into organisations such as Capita. What consideration has been given to that?”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. He mentioned:”