Maurice Bradley
East Londonderry · Democratic Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“The proposal to establish formally the post of Commissioner for Victims and Witnesses of Crime, which is efficiently held in designate form by Geraldine Hanna at the moment, has the potential to provide victims with a stronger voice and ensure that public bodies are held to account for the services that they provide.”
“Good intentions alone are not enough. <BR /> <BR />I would argue that victims must never become an afterthought in our justice system, whether that be when considering road traffic offences, violence against women and girls, child criminal exploitation, hate crime or sentencing reform.”
“I will speak as a DUP member of the Justice Committee on the Second Stage of the Victims and Witnesses of Crime Bill. For me, the Bill is not simply about creating another office or changing another piece of legislation; it is about people.”
“<BR /> <BR />As the Bill progresses through Committee Stage, I will approach its policy objectives with an open mind. I look forward to hearing directly from victims' organisations, witnesses, legal professionals and criminal justice agencies. Where the Bill can be strengthened, it should be strengthened.”
“One of the comments that I hear most often is not about what happened but about how people felt afterwards. They felt forgotten, left in the dark and like just another case number moving slowly through a system that they did not understand. That should concern every one of us. Justice should not end when an offender is charged.”
“Minister, you have partially answered my question, but it was really about the fact that, when services are centralised in the greater Belfast area, services are denied to those elsewhere in the Province. There has been a continued reduction in services across Northern Ireland because of their centralisation in Belfast.”
The complete record
Every one of 577 lines we hold for Maurice Bradley, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 12.
“<BR /> <BR />As the Bill progresses through Committee Stage, I will approach its policy objectives with an open mind. I look forward to hearing directly from victims' organisations, witnesses, legal professionals and criminal justice agencies. Where the Bill can be strengthened, it should be strengthened. Where concerns are identified, we should address them. Victims deserve more than warm words from the Assembly. They deserve a justice system that listens, responds and stands beside them at a most difficult time in their life. I look forward to playing my part in ensuring that the legislation achieves exactly that, if it passes at Second Stage.”
“Good intentions alone are not enough. <BR /> <BR />I would argue that victims must never become an afterthought in our justice system, whether that be when considering road traffic offences, violence against women and girls, child criminal exploitation, hate crime or sentencing reform. Behind every statistic is a real person whose life has been changed for ever. The justice system exists, first and foremost, to deliver justice. It must punish those who offend, but it must also care for those who have suffered because of offending. If the Bill helps victims to understand their rights, receive better communication, access the support that they need and have confidence that someone is championing their interests, it will be a positive step forward.”
“The proposal to establish formally the post of Commissioner for Victims and Witnesses of Crime, which is efficiently held in designate form by Geraldine Hanna at the moment, has the potential to provide victims with a stronger voice and ensure that public bodies are held to account for the services that they provide. However, the work of the members of the Justice Committee is only beginning. The legislation has not yet been subjected to detailed scrutiny. We owe it to victims and witnesses to ensure that we get this right. We need to examine whether the proposed commissioner will have sufficient powers to make a real difference, whether agencies have the resources to deliver what the Bill requires and whether the changes will lead to practical improvements rather than simply to additional bureaucracy.”
“One of the comments that I hear most often is not about what happened but about how people felt afterwards. They felt forgotten, left in the dark and like just another case number moving slowly through a system that they did not understand. That should concern every one of us. Justice should not end when an offender is charged. Justice also means ensuring that victims are treated with dignity, kept informed and supported throughout what can be months or even years of court proceedings. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the intention behind the Bill.”
“I will speak as a DUP member of the Justice Committee on the Second Stage of the Victims and Witnesses of Crime Bill. For me, the Bill is not simply about creating another office or changing another piece of legislation; it is about people. As MLAs, every one of us has sat across a desk from constituents whose lives have been turned upside down by crime. We have listened to victims of burglary who no longer feel safe in their home and to victims of assault whose confidence has been shattered. We have listened to victims of hate crime, to families grieving the loss of a loved one and to witnesses who did the right thing by coming forward but found the process daunting and, at times, overwhelming.”
“Minister, you have partially answered my question, but it was really about the fact that, when services are centralised in the greater Belfast area, services are denied to those elsewhere in the Province. There has been a continued reduction in services across Northern Ireland because of their centralisation in Belfast. I will give you an example. Antrim Area Hospital is 14 miles from the best hospital services in Northern Ireland. The Causeway Hospital is 47 miles from Antrim. It does not make sense to me to reduce the possibilities for treatment by reducing the number of areas in which people can receive that treatment.”
“Armed Forces Day provides an important opportunity to recognise the professionalism, commitment and sacrifice of those who serve. Coleraine demonstrated, once again, its pride in our armed forces, and the community demonstrated its gratitude for all that they do. I place on record my sincere thanks to all serving personnel, veterans, reservists, cadets and military families. Their service deserves our recognition and appreciation not only on Armed Forces Day but throughout the year.”
“I was pleased to join fellow elected representatives at the celebrations, especially my colleagues the deputy First Minister and the party leader, Gavin Robinson, as well, of course, as veterans, serving personnel and members of the public. It was particularly encouraging to see so many young people engaging with the event and learning more about the role and history of our armed forces. I commend Causeway Coast and Glens Borough Council, the 38 (Irish) Brigade, the Royal Irish Regiment, veterans' organisations, volunteers, performers, the emergency services and all those whose hard work ensured the success of the day.”
“Throughout the afternoon, families and visitors enjoyed military displays, exhibitions, live entertainment and community activities, creating a positive and inclusive atmosphere for people of all ages. Among the highlights were the impressive RAF Falcons parachute display, the ceremonial gun salute by 206 (Ulster) Battery Royal Artillery and the fly-past by the Battle of Britain memorial flight Dakota aircraft. All served as a powerful reminder of the courage and sacrifice of previous generations.”
“I record my appreciation to everyone who contributed to the tremendous success of Armed Forces Day 2026 in Coleraine. On Saturday, thousands gathered in the town to recognise and celebrate the contribution made by serving personnel, veterans, reservists, cadets and military families. The event demonstrated the strong bond that exists between our armed forces and the communities that they serve. <BR /> <BR />The day began with a drumhead service and a wreath-laying ceremony at the war memorial, providing a fitting opportunity to remember those who made the supreme sacrifice and to reflect on the dedication and service of all who have worn the uniform of our nation. The Armed Forces Day parade, led by the Royal Irish Regiment, received a warm welcome through the streets of Coleraine from the spectators who lined both sides.”
“I would like to see "may" replaced by "must" or "shall". I hope that the Minister can address those points when she is summing up.”
“I would like to see "may" replaced by "must" or "shall". <BR /> <BR />Where new clause 26A(6) says:”
“I thank the Minister for that intervention; it has cleared up quite a bit. <BR /> <BR />Accreditation should mean more than adding names to a register. It must provide genuine assurance of competence, professionalism and accountability. Restorative justice can play an important role in rehabilitation, but public confidence depends on robust oversight, clear standards and effective scrutiny. <BR /> <BR />If I may, I will address amendment No 87. New clause 26A(3) says that "requirements may include". I would like to see a change in that wording to "must" or "shall". <BR /> <BR />New clause 26A(5) says:”
“There is a risk that excessive bureaucracy could discourage participation without necessarily improving outcomes. Accreditation should mean more than adding names —.”
“I will address the group 7 amendments, with particular focus on amendment No 87 and the proposed accreditation framework for restorative justice practitioners. Whilst I support restorative justice where it is delivered professionally, consistently and with the confidence of victims and the wider public, I am not convinced that the amendment provides sufficient detail on how the proposed system will operate. Who will set the standards? How will practitioners be assessed? What safeguards will exist to ensure consistency across all organisations? Most importantly, who will be held accountable if those standards are not met? <BR /> <BR />We must also consider the impact on smaller community organisations that have long been involved in restorative work.”
“I thank the Minister for her answer, but she will appreciate my concern that anybody in the House, when talking about the north-west, means Londonderry and Strabane. The north and the north-east, which run from Greysteel to Cushendun and Cushendall and cover the hinterlands of Kilrea and Garvagh, are often forgotten about and overlooked in the Chamber, hence my question.”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. How can he ensure that this programme is scaled up? Is Causeway Coast and Glens one of the eight council areas that he referenced, given the pressures that there are with holiday homes and second homes in the north coast area?”
“Thank you very much. Your contribution so far has been passionate and sincere. However, I have a different opinion of the work of social services, and it is based on personal experience. A young victim thought it necessary to take her life rather than have the continuous break-up of her family because of a crime that had been committed within the family. I have concerns about social services' dictatorial manner of dealing with things, "You will do. You must do. You should do". I just wanted to flag that.”
“Given the latest riots, can the Minister update the House on how his Department and the Northern Ireland Housing Executive have managed those who have, sadly, had to leave their homes?”
“Protecting the public should never mean abandoning the principles of fairness on which our society is built. Equally, safeguarding individual rights should never prevent us from taking the necessary action to prevent tragedy on our roads. For those reasons, I support amendments Nos 74, 75 and 90.”
“<BR /> <BR />That is not to say that e-scooters have no place in Northern Ireland. They may well form part of a more sustainable transport system in the future. However, before wider adoption can be considered, there must be comprehensive legislation, clear safety standards, appropriate infrastructure and effective public education. <BR /> <BR />The convenience of emerging technologies should never come at the expense of public safety. Ultimately, we must reject the false choice between road safety and civil liberties. We can support robust action against drug-impaired driving while insisting that enforcement measures remain fair, proportionate and just. We can embrace innovation in transport while ensuring that appropriate safeguards are in place to protect all road users and scooter users.”
“Northern Ireland's roads were not designed for e-scooters. Potholes, uneven surfaces and narrow pavements increase the likelihood of accidents. Without dedicated infrastructure or clear regulations, e-scooter riders are forced to share spaces with pedestrians and motorists, which creates hazards for everyone. <BR /> <BR />There are also concerns about accountability and insurance. Unlike cars and motorcycles, many e-scooters are operated without insurance, which leaves the victims potentially facing difficulties when trying to obtain compensation after an accident has occurred. <BR /> <BR />The same concerns apply to scramblers and other off-road vehicles when they are used irresponsibly in public spaces. When misused, they present a significant danger to the wider community.”
“Despite that, many individuals continue to use them in public spaces and are often unaware that they may be breaking the law. That lack of understanding creates difficulties for enforcement and uncertainty for the public. <BR /> <BR />The risk associated with e-scooter use cannot be ignored. They are capable of travelling at speeds exceeding 45 mph or more, and, when operated on busy pavements, they pose serious dangers to pedestrians, especially older people, young children and those with visual impairments. Many users fail to wear protective equipment, which increases the risk of a serious injury. Across the United Kingdom, emergency departments have reported increasing numbers of injuries relating to e-scooters, from fractures to life-threatening head traumas. <BR /> <BR />The infrastructure presents another challenge.”
“A few weeks before that, at the corner of Park Street and Church Street, I nearly walked into an e-scooter that was carrying three young girls. Thankfully, they were not travelling at an excessive speed and they managed to maintain control of the scooter. <BR /> <BR />Those incidents highlight the significant gap between awareness and regulation. A person who rides a bicycle is expected to wear a helmet. Cyclists cannot legally ride through pedestrian zones or on footpaths in any circumstances, yet there remains considerable confusion about the use of e-scooters, particularly those that are privately owned. Currently, privately owned scooters cannot legally be used on public roads, pavements or cycle lanes in Northern Ireland.”
“The public's trust depends not only on effective enforcement but on fairness and accountability. The vast majority of motorists are responsible individuals. They simply travel to work, take their children to school, visit their family and friends and go about their business. They deserve protection from dangerous drivers, but they also deserve to be treated with dignity and respect. <BR /> <BR />I also wish to address an issue that is becoming a growing problem on our roads and pavements: the increasing use of e-scooters and the dangers that they present to the public. Only last week, while driving through Coleraine, I observed four young men on e-scooters. They were using police no-waiting signs as makeshift seats, and not one of them was wearing a helmet.”
“Increasingly, concerns are being raised that some approaches to roadside drug testing risk treating law-abiding motorists as though they are guilty until proven innocent. For many people, being stopped, tested, questioned and potentially detained can feel intimidating and humiliating. There are legitimate concerns about false positives and the detection of substances that remain in a person's system long after the impairment effects have worn off. The objective must be to improve road safety, not to create an atmosphere in which responsible motorists feel criminalised. It is essential to have clear operational guidelines, rigorous standards for testing equipment, comprehensive officer training and robust safeguards for those who believe that they have been wrongly accused.”
“We cannot afford to lose anyone because we did not equip the law enforcement agencies with the appropriate powers to tackle impairment on our roads.”
“She was an only child and had recently graduated. She was looking forward to beginning her career as a primary-school teacher. She was a beautiful young woman with natural blonde ringlets that many Irish dancers spend considerable amounts of money trying to replicate, but hers were completely natural. Twenty-five years later, it is still raw. When I visit her parents, her photograph still hangs on the wall. There remains an empty place at the family table that has never been filled. That tragedy was caused by drink-driving. <BR /> <BR />The consequences of drug-impaired driving are no different. The grief experienced by families who lose loved ones is exactly the same. We cannot afford to lose more young lives because we failed to act.”
“I rise as a member of the Justice Committee to support amendment Nos 74, 75 and 90. I would like to make one thing clear: anyone who drives while impaired by drugs poses a serious danger to themselves and others. Road safety must always be a priority, and the police should have the necessary tools to remove dangerous drivers from our roads. <BR /> <BR />I support the introduction of drug-testing powers comparable to those that currently exist for drink-driving, whether on suspicion of impaired or erratic driving or following a road traffic collision. <BR /> <BR />My support for the amendments is rooted not only in principle but in personal experience. Twenty-five years ago, at 2.00 am on 31 March 2001, I received the devastating news that my cousin Jill Bradley had been killed by a drunk driver. Jill was 22 years old.”
“If those principles are maintained, these amendments have the potential to strengthen trust in policing and confidence in the wider justice system. For those reasons, while recognising that continued scrutiny will be necessary, I welcome the intent behind these amendments but, without further clarification, I do not see how they can work. We will wait to see how the rest of the debate unfolds.”
“<BR /> <BR />In conclusion, I believe that these amendments represent a significant and largely positive development in police accountability arrangements. The provisions that relate to former officers address an obvious gap in the current system. The creation of a police barred list closes a loophole that should never have existed. The police advisory list provides greater transparency with regard to unsolved allegations. The ombudsman provisions seek to ensure that serious misconduct can, where circumstances require, be addressed more effectively. However, the success of the reforms will, ultimately, depend not on what is written in legislation but on how those powers are exercised in practice. The guiding principles must remain those of proportionality, transparency, fairness and public confidence.”
“Policing is among the most challenging professions in our society. Thousands of officers and staff serve honourably every day under significant pressure. Nothing in these amendments should be interpreted as criticism of those who carry out their duties professionally and with integrity. Indeed, effective accountability mechanisms ultimately strengthen policing because they reinforce public confidence in the overwhelming majority who do their jobs diligently. Strong accountability protects good officers as much as it protects the public. When misconduct occurs, it damages confidence in the entire service. Addressing misconduct effectively, therefore, serves the interests of policing itself. That is why it is so important that these reforms strike the correct balance.”
“The ombudsman amendments seek to strengthen the ability to respond to serious cases where public confidence may otherwise be undermined. While each of those objectives may be legitimate, the amendments raise serious concerns about their outworking. Each also requires careful implementation. The Assembly should therefore continue to monitor how the powers operate in practice. The Justice Committee will undoubtedly take an interest in how regulations are developed and how those arrangements function once enacted.”
“The challenge lies in achieving both objectives simultaneously. Throughout scrutiny of justice legislation, a recurring theme emerges, which is that the public and victims expect accountability, but accountability must never be at the expense of expediency. <BR /> <BR />The justice system functions effectively when decisions are evidence-based, proportionate and fair. That principle should guide the implementation of every amendment before us. The amendments that deal with former officers acknowledge that accountability and the fact that it should not automatically end at retirement. The barred list recognises that serious misconduct should carry meaningful consequences. The advisory list recognises that unresolved allegations remain relevant to future employment decisions.”
“The amendments therefore seek to address that concern, but I still have reservations. One of the cornerstones of our justice system is due process. Criminal investigations and disciplinary investigations frequently overlap. The danger in creating mechanisms for accelerated disciplinary action is that they may unintentionally prejudice criminal proceedings or create perceptions of prejudgement. I note that the amendments contain a safeguard in that they require consideration where misconduct proceedings would prejudice criminal proceedings. That safeguard is welcome; nevertheless, I believe that careful consideration is required regarding the practical operation of those provisions. The Assembly must be satisfied that the pursuit of speed does not compromise fairness. Public confidence is enhanced when decisions are both swift and robust.”
“<BR /> <BR />I turn to amendment Nos 76 and 77, which relate to the Police Ombudsman. Our party has reservations about those and will seek clarification on them. The amendments provide the ombudsman with powers to submit reports to the appropriate authority before investigations or criminal proceedings have concluded where certain conditions are met. The intention behind the amendments is understandable, but we still need clarity. Where there is compelling evidence of gross misconduct and where it is considered to be in the public interest for an officer to cease serving without delay, there should be mechanisms available to address that situation. <BR /> <BR />Police confidence can be seriously damaged when officers who face extremely serious allegations remain in post for extended periods while processes continue.”
“The advisory list seeks to ensure that the relevant information is available when future employment is considered. Again, I understand that principle. The public would rightly question a system that allows unresolved allegations simply to disappear. However, I also believe that careful implementation will be critical. Inclusion on an advisory list is not the same as a finding of misconduct. That distinction is extremely important. Natural justice requires that unresolved allegations are treated differently from proven misconduct. I therefore encourage the Department to ensure that appropriate safeguards, review mechanisms and data protection arrangements are in place. The objective is to have informed decision-making, not prejudgement. That distinction matters greatly.”
“I note positively that the legislation provides mechanisms for removal from the barred list where dismissals are overturned or found to be unfair. That is essential. No accountability system can command confidence unless it contains effective safeguards against error. Justice requires both accountability and fairness; one cannot exist without the other. <BR /> <BR />The creation of a police advisory list is perhaps less well known, but it may be equally important. Unlike the barred list, the advisory list is for situations where allegations remain unresolved because an individual resigns or retires before proceedings have concluded. That addresses a long-standing concern. If an individual leaves during an investigation, future employers may be unaware that serious allegations exist.”
“<BR /> <BR />Public confidence depends not on organisational labels but on standards. The standards expected of those exercising public authority should therefore apply consistently. The Justice Committee has long recognised the importance of public confidence in policing. Confidence is built not solely through operational success but through trust, accountability and demonstrating that misconduct has consequences. The police barred list therefore represents a potentially important step forward. <BR /> <BR />I caution, however, that safeguards are equally important. A decision that effectively prevents an individual from working in policing or law enforcement can have lifelong consequences. Such decisions must therefore be robust, transparent and capable of challenge.”
“<BR /> <BR />The public rightly expect that those entrusted with significant powers, including powers of arrest, detention and investigation, meet the highest standards of integrity. When those standards are breached in a serious way, there must be consequences. The police barred list seeks to ensure precisely that by creating a formal mechanism to prevent individuals who have been dismissed for serious misconduct from obtaining employment elsewhere in policing or law enforcement. In practical terms, that closes a loophole that has existed for far too long. The barred list also extends beyond PSNI officers, covering police support staff, senior officers, airport police, harbour police and various categories of personnel who exercise law enforcement functions. Having that breadth is important.”
“Without clear guidance, however, there is a risk that expectations will be raised that cannot ultimately be fulfilled. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 69 and the substantial provisions in proposed new schedule 5 under amendment No 127 will create a police barred list and a police advisory list. In many respects, they are among the most significant reforms in the Bill. The purpose is straightforward: an individual who has been dismissed for serious misconduct, or who would have been dismissed had they remained in service, should not simply move elsewhere within policing or law enforcement without that history being known. That is a principle that most Members will find difficult to oppose.”
“Those tests are important, because they recognise that not every historical complaint should automatically trigger disciplinary proceedings years after an officer has left service. There must be proportionality. There must be a clear public interest. There must be a recognition that memories fade, that evidence becomes more difficult to obtain and that fairness applies to respondents as well as complainants. That balance is reflected in the amendment, so it should be welcomed. I also encourage the Minister to ensure, however, that any regulations developed under the provisions provide clarity about timescales and evidential thresholds. Uncertainty benefits nobody. Victims deserve clarity. Former officers deserve clarity. The public deserve clarity.”
“Where there are allegations of serious misconduct, particularly misconduct that would have led to dismissal had the officer remained in service, there is a legitimate public interest in ensuring that the matter can be examined. <BR /> <BR />The amendment introduces several conditions that must be satisfied before proceedings can continue. Importantly, where allegations emerge after an officer has left the service and are outside the normal period, proceedings may continue only where the Police Ombudsman considers such action to be reasonable and proportionate. I welcome that safeguard. It introduces an independent assessment and requires consideration of three important factors: the seriousness of the alleged misconduct; the impact on public confidence in policing; and the wider public interest.”
“Do they maintain procedural fairness? Are they practical and proportionate? <BR /> <BR />I will begin with amendment No 68, which concerns disciplinary proceedings against former police officers. Historically, one of the most persistent criticisms of police disciplinary systems throughout these islands has been that officers can retire or resign before proceedings are completed. In many instances, that has left serious allegations unresolved and left victims and complainants feeling that justice has not been served. The amendment seeks to address that issue by allowing disciplinary proceedings to continue in certain circumstances after an officer has ceased to serve. The principle behind that is understandable. The public rightly expect that accountability should not simply disappear when an individual leaves the organisation.”
“They seek to address legitimate concerns that victims, oversight bodies and the wider public have raised about the ability of officers to evade scrutiny through resignation or retirement, as well as concerns about former officers. <BR /> <BR />Members of the Justice Committee have repeatedly stressed that confidence in the justice system depends not only on effective policing but on accountability, transparency and public trust. The public must have confidence that allegations of serious misconduct will be properly investigated and, where necessary, acted on. Equally, police officers are entitled to fair procedures and to protection from arbitrary or disproportionate action. It is therefore important that we assess the amendments through the lens of balance. Do they strengthen accountability? Do they protect the public interest?”
“I acknowledge that PSNI officers continue to undertake their role in difficult times. We must not lose sight of that. <BR /> <BR />Taken together, the amendments represent some of the most significant reforms to police accountability arrangements that the Assembly has considered for many years. We acknowledge that some of the reforms did not come before the Committee. They will therefore require further scrutiny and discussion. Hopefully, the Committee Chairman and the Minister of Justice will deal with that issue throughout the summer months. <BR /> <BR />The powers for the Police Ombudsman and the establishment of a police barred list and a police advisory list are very good. Taken together, they represent some of the most significant reforms to police accountability that the Assembly has considered. I am sorry for repeating myself.”
“Before I speak to the amendments in group 4, I pay tribute to the Alliance Member, who is not in her place, for her sterling work and dedication throughout the Katie Simpson murder investigation. She deserves praise for that. <BR /> <BR />As a member of the Justice Committee, I wish to speak to the group of amendments and, at the outset, express thanks to the Chairman, Paul Frew, my colleague Brian Kingston, fellow Committee members and the Committee staff for their work in bringing the Justice Bill to what is now the halfway stage. I would also like to express thanks to the Minister for her work in achieving that. <BR /> <BR />The amendments deal primarily with police discipline, police accountability, the powers of the Police Ombudsman and the establishment of a police barred list and police advisory list.”
“The provision would address a significant gap in the current legislative framework by targeting those who facilitate or promote prostitution through advertising platforms, including digital media. <BR /> <BR />The amendment appropriately places responsibility on individuals who knowingly publish or enable advertisements for sexual services, regardless of whether they derive financial benefit. It also provides important protection for those who may be coerced into advertising their own sexual services. The measure strengthens efforts to reduce demand, tackle exploitation and support a wider strategy aimed at protecting vulnerable people from sexual exploitation. For that reason, I ask Members to support the entire group of amendments.”
“The amendment targets exploitation and criminality while recognising the need for support for those experiencing genuine hardship. <BR /> <BR />I also support amendment No 78, which recognises that advertising sexual services is often intrinsically linked to the exploitation and commodification of vulnerable individuals. It is important that the organisers are pursued vigorously and dealt with harshly by the law. We failed to deal adequately with the godfathers of terrorism. We cannot fail to deal with the godfathers of exploitation, trafficking, prostitution and sexual exploitation. We must offer support to the victims, including those who may have chosen that lifestyle.”
“That is not about targeting vulnerable people but about targeting those who enter premises or enclosed areas intending to commit theft, criminal damage or other offences. Property owners and businesses have a right to protection. The law should provide the necessary tools to deal with criminal behaviour before further offences occur. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 72 addresses the exploitation of vulnerable people through organised begging. It is well recognised that, in some cases, individuals are encouraged, controlled or exploited by others who profit from their circumstances. As a joint proposer of the amendment, I believe that the focus should be on those who arrange or facilitate begging for gain and not on those who are themselves vulnerable.”