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 65 of 83.
“I thank the Member for her intervention and totally agree with her point. The Minister is part of a body that meets with trade unions, and they have not met since September of last year. That is appalling. The Minister appears to not want to listen to those reps and trade unionists, but he absolutely should. Continuing with that theme, someone who works in education contacted me and said:”
“<BR /> <BR />Truth be told, many people have been appalled — outraged, even — by the Minister's apparent ignorance of and dismissiveness towards warnings about the safety of keeping staff and pupils in schools in the middle of a global pandemic. I suppose that the Minister has been true to his party's form by expressing downright opposition to basic scientific arguments, especially about the virus not being immune from spreading in schools, when repeatedly presented with those arguments. <BR /> <BR />I have received a lot of correspondence as, I am sure, have others, from staff in SEN schools who are very concerned about how the pandemic has been handled and how the Minister in particular has responded — or not responded — to issues and cases.”
“Let us not forget about plans not so long ago — by this Minister as well, I think — to close special needs schools and current attempts to, possibly, go down that path again in the middle of a pandemic. <BR /> <BR />Many years ago, the writer Naomi Klein warned about a "shock doctrine" approach in the aftermath of hurricane Katrina, which saw the full-scale privatisation of schools and housing in New Orleans. There cannot be a "shock doctrine" approach to education in which the pandemic is used to underfund, close or amalgamate special needs schools. I will not stand for it, and I know that teachers, parents and the trade unions will not stand for it either.”
“I thank the Chairperson of the Committee for Education for bringing this important motion to the House. It is clear that the pandemic has been very hard for many in our community, none more so than those vulnerable children and children with special educational needs. Whilst we absolutely should discuss what we can do to ensure that they and their families have adequate support, we should avoid the narrative, as others have mentioned, that everything was rosy before the pandemic. <BR /> <BR />Let us not forget that special educational needs schools have been starved of funding for so long. They have, disgracefully, been forced to fundraise themselves for necessary items such as special needs swings and other devices.”
“It is about working to achieve the same levels of elimination, suppressing the virus through reduced economic capacity, travel bans, rigorous testing and tracing and the necessary financial and mental health impacts being put in place. It means listening to the growing calls from experts and working out how that can be done in Ireland. I do not hold out much hope that the Executive will implement such a strategy on their own initiative, but our party and others across the island are doing all that they can to continue to put pressure on both Governments to ensure that we force them to adopt such a strategy.”
“There has been no attempt to come together and work together to hash out a costed zero-COVID strategy which could be implemented across this island. The absurdity of allowing a man-made border to stand in the way of getting us through this pandemic is striking. It has been said over and over again that if this was foot and mouth or some other animal-borne virus, there would have been an all-Ireland strategy on day one. Excuses, obstinacy and posturing around the border are pathetically transparent and patently dangerous. That is just one reason why the campaign for a zero-COVID strategy is gaining momentum. <BR /> <BR />A zero-COVID strategy is not about lifting the New Zealand model and dropping it over into Ireland.”
“They say that they cannot implement an elimination strategy because regulations here are different and looser, and our airports could undermine their strategy and provide back-door travel to the South. <BR /> <BR />Meanwhile, the Northern Executive muddy the water by fixating on the differences between us and New Zealand. They have referenced the cost of an elimination strategy, while the cost of their own living-with-COVID strategy surges in terms of money, impact on the health service and lives. It has even been suggested by some that an all-Ireland strategy could be the first step towards a united Ireland. The border is being cynically utilised by parties North and South as an excuse not to implement the necessary strategies and regulations to suppress this virus and to save lives.”
“Yet here we are, looking back at regulations from the Christmas period, at a time when the virus was allowed to spread once again. Where is the acceptance of culpability on behalf of the Executive? Where is the individual responsibility for the strategy advocated by this Executive? <BR /> <BR />There is a momentum growing for an entirely different approach to the regulations, which amounts to a zero-COVID strategy. That has been raised already today, and I have raised it many times in this House but have been met with derision on many occasions. Last week, I wrote to the five party leaders on the Executive about the issue, and, frankly, the excuses from the Executive and the Government for not implementing a zero-COVID policy are pathetic and dangerous, and the Irish Government are pointing the finger at the North.”
“<BR /> <BR />The key question for the Minister is this: when will the Executive learn the lessons of the failed strategy of designing rushed regulations behind closed doors that risk the health of workers and communities by allowing the virus to continue to surge and then asking the Assembly retrospectively to give permission to the regulations? Unfortunately, I do not think that I am the only person who doubts that lessons will be learned. There has been consistent talk of individual responsibility and even a shameless attempt by some on the Executive to shift the responsibility on to ordinary people.”
“Some taxi drivers, however, were approached by the PSNI for doing so, some while transporting essential healthcare workers to work or home from work. Regulations have been rushed time and time again. Half the time, Ministers are not available on the air waves beyond a quick, curt press conference to explain the details. Many people are left to ask multiple questions online and of MLAs. People rely on WhatsApp and Twitter to understand the new rules. It is clear to me that the regulations were not understood, and taxi drivers were on the receiving end of that. They should not have been approached by the police. They have been through enough already. Too many still struggle financially without having to deal with that extra pressure.”
“I have no doubt that sport can help alleviate the pressures of isolation, COVID and lockdown generally, but it is utterly baffling to me that the Executive would permit such large gatherings while criminally punishing people at socially distanced protests such as the Black Lives Matter protests. Many people will ask and have asked, "Where is the consistency? Where is the medical evidence that says that one gathering is permissible but the other is not?". The only discernible difference is that you pay into one event but not into a protest, never mind the questions around systemic racism. <BR /> <BR />The amendment (No. 25) regulations allowed taxi drivers to operate after 8.00 pm over the Christmas period. I do not think that anyone would oppose that.”
“<BR /> <BR />The regulations before us relate to the Christmas period and, in some cases, just before. It is worth remembering that the Health Minister has already publicly admitted that the Executive got it wrong in how they handled that period. How many cases were contracted unnecessarily? How many deaths have occurred because of the decisions made by the Executive before the Christmas period, which we are able to discuss — some of them — only today, at the end of January? <BR /> <BR />One of the amendments allows for up to 500 people to attend a sporting event.”
“It is bad enough that Governments around the world have been able to do this much more rigorously and effectively, but, when the regulations actively allow a deadly virus to surge, allow for the criminalising of protests and put workers at risk, the lack of accountability and scrutiny is totally negligent. <BR /> <BR />It seems clear to everyone that the current regulations will be extended to early March if not beyond, but when will we debate those decisions? In April or May, when the regulations have already been implemented? As others have said, why are we not discussing in the House the long-term strategy for dealing with the virus? This charade and the Executive's strategy have left us with one of the worst records in the world of dealing with the virus, and that needs to end.”
“I have been incredibly frustrated for almost a year by the way in which the Executive have implemented regulations, not solely because their strategy of living with COVID is utterly reckless, which I will come to, but because of the nonsensical charade whereby we are expected retrospectively to give approval to or discuss regulations that have long been implemented and, in some cases, are out of date. There is no real semblance of oversight, transparency or accountability. The latest regulations are cooked up behind closed doors, often diverging from health advice, and pushed through without a pick of scrutiny.”
“I thank Mr Sheehan for asking the question. The point is that it is not just about going to the private sector. It is about bringing those beds, that capacity and those staff members under the control and direction of the NHS. Given that we are almost one year into the pandemic and that we are and have been plagued by shortages, will the Minister inform us as to whether that issue has been raised at the Executive? If so, what is the political rationale for opposing the moves that are proposed in the question?”
“The fact that so much money has been unspent and might be handed back while so many people have fallen through the cracks is a cruel joke. Has the Minister or his Department costed a zero-COVID-19 strategy for the North and what work, if any, has his Department done with its counterpart in the Irish Government to cost an all-Ireland zero-COVID-19 strategy to protect people from this deadly virus and its new variants?”
“I do not think that I need to explain to this Chamber why I think that such meetings should be recorded. <BR /> <BR />That is further reason for our opposition to amendment No 23, which would see vast exemptions to meetings where civil servants need to be present. Again, this is a basic function of transparency and accountability. I hope that, in his closing remarks, the Minister will provide some clarity on the outworkings of amendment No 23. <BR /> <BR />Finally, I wish to speak to amendment No 36, which we welcome. To lump civil servants in with Ministers and spads would be a mistake, and that was touched upon in the previous debate, many weeks ago. It is not only in the case of culpability, but, hopefully, this amendment can protect the many ordinary workers in the Civil Service who need to be protected by this Bill.”
“Indeed, I argue for issues in this Chamber that community groups endorse and that I believe would benefit all aspects of society, but there are people here, probably on the Benches opposite, who would robustly disagree with me on those issues. In this case, I am unconvinced that a Minister could be totally unbiased about the impact of individual cases of lobbying when making a decision in that regard. <BR /> <BR />I want to speak briefly to amendment No 22, elements of which give concern to me and my party. For instance, in a totally hypothetical scenario, if a Minister and their spad were to hold a meeting with Moy Park as official business but a civil servant was not present, relevant arrangements would not have to be put in place to record an account of that meeting.”
“Lobbying is lobbying is lobbying. If someone, or their party, potentially, sits to gain from that lobbying, it should be registered — simple as that. I cannot think of any function of any Department that should be free of registering lobbying, and I do not see here the justification or rationale for that or the need for the amendment. <BR /> <BR />An aspect of amendment No 33 would give leeway in the recording of lobbying from community groups when the lobbying is done on an issue which is mutually beneficial to all sections of society. My concern here would be that the judgment of what benefits all of society could vary from Minister to Minister.”
“We cannot have one rule for Ministers and another for everybody else. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 28 seeks to curtail the need to record lobbying in some instances. Again, for me, this is unacceptable and not necessary. I have not heard a good explanation of the rationale for that either. In this case, the Bill reads:”
“Whatever the reason, we do not have any truck with it. If you are in official meetings, potentially discussing the expenditure of public funds and making decisions that impact on people in our communities, you should be prepared to be on the record and in the minute book, and you should be prepared to be totally honest about what is being said and, potentially, being agreed. If we expect people on universal credit to detail, in an online journal, every aspect of their life and how they spend it to get very meagre benefits, and if they do not, they are financially penalised, the least that we should expect from our Ministers, who are very well remunerated, is that they ensure that their meetings, especially those relating to their Department and actions taken by them, are recorded.”
“My response is that the risk of allowing the official business of Ministers to go unrecorded and unaccounted for is far greater, especially given the various botched schemes and previous scandals that, unfortunately, attest loudly to that. <BR /> <BR />I do not think that anyone would expect a civil servant to attend a meeting of his Minster's party or every meeting with an MLA in the House. However, when Ministers are acting in an official capacity or engaging in official business, one has to wonder what they would have to hide and why they would oppose a civil servant being in the room. Some time ago, David Sterling mused that records of meetings and recorded minutes might be embarrassing for some Ministers and their parties. Perhaps that is why there is some opposition to having civil servants in such meetings.”
“Some amendments, in particular amendment Nos 23 and 28, would even water down transparency and accountability measures. Amendment No 23 would allow for a wide range of meetings about official business at which a civil servant did not need to be present. That could, undoubtedly, result in a meeting between a Minister from the Executive and a Minister from across the water, in which they talk about schemes involving public money, not being recorded and decisions not being registered. It would be a repeat of the lack of transparency that gave rise to the likes of the RHI scheme being implemented. The Minister's reasoning was that asking civil servants to attend every meeting would be too tall a task.”
“I will not comment on whether I will get through the gate of heaven. After this debate, it is unlikely. <BR /> <BR />I want to speak to the clauses behind the amendments in group 2. There is some important stuff in the amendments that my party and I oppose, and I will speak to that now. Recording minutes, having a register of interests and ensuring the presence of a civil servant at meetings are some of the most basic forms of accountability and transparency that should be expected of Ministers. That a Bill is needed to tighten up or, in some cases, introduce those measures is testament to the lack of accountability that we have seen from this Executive for too long. <BR /> <BR />To be honest, the legislation could go much further.”
“<BR /> <BR />If we had been bringing through the Bill, we would have sought to go much further and, in some cases, in different directions. I remain as unconvinced as ever that strengthening the hand of this institution when it comes to doling out punishment or taking action is the sole solution to many of the scandalous problems at the heart of the Assembly. As it goes, we are obviously not calling the shots, probably to the relief of many in the upper echelons of the Assembly, but we are able to talk to some measures in the Bill that seek to curtail the actions and conditions that led to the RHI scandal in the first place. <BR /> <BR />We are satisfied with most of the amendments and seek clarification of amendment Nos 48, 49 and 50.”
“We have gone long enough with a lack of rules in this place and the scandalous effects resulting from them. We would be in favour, without further explanation from the Minister, of introducing the measures as quickly as possible. <BR /> <BR />To be frank, if we were in the Executive and in a position to set rules on the issue — we are obviously not — junior Ministers would not have spads. There would never have been as many spads to begin with, and they should have and would have been paid in line with the average worker's wage, along with Ministers. The upper echelons of this institution should not be and would not have been allowed to get away with some of the dodgy schemes and decisions that we have seen over the past 10 years and, in some cases, longer.”
“<BR /> <BR />From my reading, at least, of some of the amendments, it is concerning that, while the Bill's sponsor seeks to ensure that as much as possible of the Bill comes into effect the day after it receives Royal Assent, the Minister wants to put in a six-month delay for some clauses and, indeed, to maintain a delay until 1 April for others. Will the Minister, in his closing remarks, speak to his desire and rationale for that? I did not hear it in his introduction of the amendments, especially on the ability to appoint a spad and insert a six-month delay before the changes to the code of conduct will be made. His answer may provide clarity on the amendments that we will vote on shortly. I cannot see the need to push the measures back.”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak about the Bill again. One of the most pressing matters of this part of the debate is when we get the measures into place in the Assembly and when they will come into operation. Few of us will doubt why it is important to get changes relating to junior Ministers and spads in place as swiftly as possible and to ensure that there is a code of practice in place that at least attempts to get the standard of behaviour from those is power and their advisers that the public should expect.”
“It is very concerning that the Budget represents a flat-cash position, and it is very disappointing that most Departments will, effectively, have to face reductions, as the Minister stated. It seems as though the lessons of the last 10 years have not been learned. The squeezing and cutting of services will be ramped up if this goes ahead. What discussions has the Minister or his officials had with the Secretary of State about implementing a COVID wealth tax? To me, it is absolutely disgusting that, during this pandemic, billionaires have increased their wealth by £25 billion at the last count and likely by more now, and we are asked to take crumbs to deliver our public services over the next number of years.”
“The question for those in power today is whether they want history to say that that fight had to be taken to their door.”
“Until the Assembly does what is right for women, for their children and for their communities more generally, it will continue to perpetuate the conditions that enable domestic abuse to continue. <BR /> <BR />In closing, I want to use the opportunity to issue this call to those in charge of healthcare, social security, education, finance and employment: the conditions created by policies under your control are harming women and children, and, indeed, all victims and survivors of domestic abuse. It is not acceptable that, instead of their suffering being alleviated, it is deepened by the actions of those institutions and by decisions that are made or not made. The fight for a better kind of society will happen, where it always does, on the streets, in communities and in workplaces.”
“There is a lack of proper and independent access to decent social security and a lack of access to sex education. Those are rights that everyone should have but that too many in the North go without. Of course, the problem goes far beyond the issues that I have referred to and raised today, given the precarious work of women and the way in which the state underfunds and underpays for caring work that is predominantly taken up by women. All of that is to say that we can never look at the issue of domestic abuse, or any kind of gender-based violence, in isolation. Only when a societal shift is fought for and won will we see the oppression and inequalities facing women being properly challenged, and that shift, unfortunately, will come not solely from within these four walls but from campaigns and movements outside.”
“How many more women will be forced to stay in an abusive relationship because of a pregnancy or be forced to carry a pregnancy to term, against their will, because of an abusive partner? How many more women are unable to escape domestic abuse because, under universal credit, their abuser holds access to their funds? How many will stay in a refuge because they cannot get access to social housing or who cannot rent because of poverty? How many will never get access to a refuge because the refuges are full to capacity on the day? That is the case because we do not, as Ms Dillon referred to, adequately fund emergency services. How many of those women will have children who will experience that process? <BR /> <BR />There is a lack of access to telemedical abortion and to social housing or a refuge.”
“I have probably passed the threshold of being considered young, and some time ago, but it was not that long ago that I was educated — perhaps in inverted commas — in sex education and relationships, and the experience was completely inadequate. Unfortunately, to this day, far too many pupils feel that that is the case. <BR /> <BR />If the Bill is to slot into a strategy aimed at reducing gender-based violence, we need to see it sit alongside proper sex education. Indeed, we need to see it sit alongside proper access to abortion and other healthcare issues, including telemedicine. How often do we need to hear about the impact of restricting access to abortion before we see the Health Minister act on the issue? How many more women will be forced to travel for healthcare during a deadly pandemic?”
“The biggest challenge to gender-based violence will come from the fight against inequalities and oppression in society, which are, very often, not only enshrined by institutions but made worse and perpetrated by those in the institutions. Much of the gender-based violence that we see in society is a breach of consent and the use of power imbalances to exert control, yet the very sex education system, as has been referred to, that many experts say is vital to the prevention of those kinds of sexual crimes is not really accessible in any real sense for far too many young people in our schools, and if it is accessible, it is not adequate. Through sex education, we can convey the importance of equality between partners, promote non-stereotyped gender roles and teach mutual respect and consent.”
“Those are vital in order to alleviate the situation facing victims of domestic abuse.”
“It is disappointing that that is not in the Bill. I mention women specifically because domestic violence is largely gender-based, and it affects women. The disproportionate effect on women is referenced in statistics. It has roots that are deeply entrenched in inequalities and stereotypes about the role of women in society. It is for that reason that we are clear that, unfortunately, one single piece of legislation or a single strategy cannot tackle the problem of the root causes of those issues. It is right to legislate for the protection of victims, access to legal aid and other issues.”
“I welcome the progress of the Bill. A lot of its measures, particularly on access to legal aid for victims, training for staff and keeping records of abuse, will undoubtedly have a positive and important impact. I want to speak about the roots of abuse in society and situate the Bill in the fight for a better society that has no abuse. <BR /> <BR />As was mentioned, the weekly average for the number of domestic abuse calls to the police since the first lockdown was almost 600 calls every week, predominately from women who feel unsafe in their home. That is totally unacceptable. It is endemic, both societally and institutionally, and I hope that the Bill goes some way towards tackling those problems. <BR /> <BR />In a previous debate, I said that we need a commissioner for domestic abuse and violence and a strategy for women and girls.”
“I thank the Minister for the statement. She will be aware of ambulance services from the South being supplied to assist the COVID effort in the North. As was mentioned, there have been problems around sharing data. My question is similar to Miss Woods's question. Was there any discussion during the meeting on long-term cooperation on health and specifically on the establishment of an all-Ireland NHS?”
“Instead of enforcing legislation that criminalises anti-racist protests, the Executive need to ensure that the laws that they pass and police do not disproportionately impact on marginalised communities. They should not defend police action as proportionate, as the deputy first Minister and the Justice Minister did in this case. If the Executive have any intention of having even a modicum of racial equality in society, they must ensure that the fines are dropped. The Minister of Justice, the deputy First Minister and the Executive as a whole must do everything that they can to ensure that the fines are rescinded and work to rectify the hurtful damage that has been done by that approach. I commend the petition to the House. Thank you.”
“<BR /> <BR />Whilst the PSNI distributed fines to protesters for allegedly breaking social-distancing guidelines, we did not see the same approach being taken towards those who own care homes and who have let the virus rip, which has taken the life of far too many, or employers who have put staff at risk by forcing them into work when they can obviously work from home. Indeed, the week after the protest on 6 June, we saw a "defend the statues" protest at City Hall, with no social distancing whatsoever or widespread mask wearing, but not a single fine or legal threat was issued. That double-standard approach cannot continue. <BR /> <BR />The weekend's events and the statistics over the past number of years that show that racial crimes outstrip sectarian crimes clearly demonstrate that we have a problem with racism in society.”
“Racism, as we heard, is a horrible cancer in our communities, and, worryingly, it is on the rise. The issuing of such a disproportionate number of fines to people who took part in events that were not only righteous and important but safe should never happen again. Our cities should be places where minorities can express their rights, demonstrate and show their disgust at racial injustice. Never again should members of the BAME community or any other minority community here be frightened to take a stand for what they believe in.”
“Disgracefully, those protestors were targeted by last-minute rules that were brought in by the Executive at the eleventh hour, which gave the green light to the PSNI to target those who attended a protest that was widely commended for maintaining social distancing.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank you and the Business Committee for allowing me to present the petition, which calls for fines that were issued after the 6 June 2020 Black Lives Matter protests to be dropped. I want to thank publicly Mr Reece Lawson for organising the petition, the almost 6,000 members of the public who signed it and everybody who shared and promoted it. <BR /> <BR />As the petition states, people who attended the protests on 6 June were standing against racism and joined with millions of others across the world who were repulsed and infuriated by the murder of George Floyd in America.”
“Recent PSNI discrimination against anti-racist protesters and a long-term failure by the Executive to implement a racial equality strategy means that tackling this institutional racism must be an immediate task. I offer my solidarity to everybody in the BMCA.”
“Whilst we must stand against these attacks, we must also vigorously challenge and oppose the ideas that give them fuel and cover. <BR /> <BR />It is disgusting beyond words to think that an organisation that carries out such excellent work was targeted in this way by narrow-minded bigots and racists. It is worth noting that the BMCA has, in the recent past, contacted the PSNI, as well as other statutory organisations, about instances of intimidation, and it has stated that those warnings were not taken seriously enough or, worse, were met with a response based on victim blaming. Belfast and our society clearly has a racism problem, with racist attacks now, tragically, outnumbering sectarian ones.”
“<BR /> <BR />I commend the BMCA, all those who offered solidarity in the aftermath of this attack, people like Patrick Corrigan of Amnesty International, who set up an online fundraising drive, which has raised over £50,000 so far, and everybody who quickly donated over the weekend in a sign of solidarity. <BR /> <BR />We have to recognise and understand that this attack did not come from nowhere. For years, members of the migrant community, and in particular people from the Islamic community, have been vilified, profiled and attacked by Governments across the world. We have been told that we must be suspicious and unwelcoming of them, because they may have different religious beliefs or come from different parts of the world. This attack is the result, tragically, of decades of Islamophobia and racism.”
“Last weekend, we witnessed harrowing scenes of a building, which in many ways represents the new multicultural and diverse Belfast and society that we want to see, set alight. Members of the Belfast Multicultural Association (BMCA), who, just last week, were collecting food to assist the local community in the middle of the pandemic, had the building that they worked in set alight and destroyed. Had this attack been carried out at any other time, we could be talking about tragedy, death and lives lost. Therefore, we need to send a resolute message to those who engaged in that hate-filled attack that they are in the minority and will not win. A clear message of solidarity and support should go out to those who volunteer for and use the BMCA that we stand with them and will do everything that we can to support them.”
“On her last point, would the Member agree that it is not as if the Minister did not have any sight that the problems would arise? He was warned by the Health Minister several weeks ago that schools should not return to business as usual.”
“Why is the Minister willing to put the health and lives of so many education workers and their families at risk? He is not fit for the job, and he should step aside. If he does not, he should be forced to do so.”