Declan Kearney
South Antrim · Sinn Féin · Northern Ireland
“The 'good jobs' Bill is designed to benefit every single worker across this society, regardless of background. It is not anti-business. It is about growing economic productivity and enhancing employment and workers' rights.”
“The rhetoric around proper scrutiny is a complete red herring; it is an attempt by the DUP to run down the clock in relation to the mandate. Why is that? What is the DUP afraid of? Why is it vetoing the 'good jobs' Bill?”
“The fallout from Brexit is a reality that is being felt hard by workers and families across the North daily, and that is illustrated in evidence sessions that we have received in the Economy Committee. In one, we learned that our electricity bills here are now higher as a result of Brexit.”
“Catastrophic, kamikaze economics, politically toxic — there is no other way to describe the Brexit debacle. Yet, 10 years on, those in the Chamber who continue to cheerlead are burying their heads in the sand.”
“The fact is that Brexit has brought a positive focus to the democratic logic of self-determination and constitutional change in Ireland. There is a way to remove the negative and enduring legacy of Brexit. Irish unity provides that option. Therefore, it is time to widen participation in the debate.”
“Minister, do you agree that the discrimination in employment and the political vetting that have been practised in this state for so long, and actively supported by some Members, have no place in today's society, and that appointment to government boards should be open to all sections of society, including such citizens as Peter Lynch?”
The complete record
Every one of 988 lines we hold for Declan Kearney, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 14 of 20.
“<BR /> <BR />Colm Gildernew outlined the wet pubs discussion that took place in the Health Committee and the Committee's discussions with the environmental health officer. He pointed out that the absence of criteria for reopening wet pubs meant that the Committee formed no view on the amendments. <BR /> <BR />Pam Cameron highlighted the relevance of the collection of postcode details in the context of the amendments, as addressed in the Committee, as a more effective means by which track and trace could be taken forward. <BR /> <BR />Paul Bradshaw questioned the region-specific scientific analysis and data that underpins the amendments and, therefore, how we arrive at decisions about the type of restrictions that are placed on the hospitality sector.”
“I welcome the debate on amendments No. 5, No. 6 and No. 7 of the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (No. 2) Regulations and thank Members for their contributions. Their concerns, questions and observations play a key role not only in scrutinising the regulations that are under debate but in helping to inform policy development as we go forward in these most challenging of times. <BR /> <BR />I will now turn to some of the points that Members made during the debate. I intend to address those contributions that were specific to the regulations. With your permission, Mr Deputy Speaker, in deference to the range of contributions, I will also acknowledge other Members and the commentary that they made during the debate.”
“It also places restrictions on the opening hours of certain venues at which alcoholic drinks and food and drink may be consumed. <BR /> <BR />I acknowledge, however, that, with the decisions that were announced last Wednesday, the situation has moved on. Now, the hospitality sector is subject to further restrictions. The Executive have not taken those decisions lightly. Tuigimid go mbeidh brúnna agus deacrachtaí suntasacha ag cur isteach go mór ar an tionscadal. Many of our friends and family are connected to the industry. Therefore, we know that licence holders have very challenging times ahead, not only for their own businesses and families but for their staff, their families and all those who rely upon that sector for their livelihoods. <BR /> <BR />Molaim an rún agus na rialacha don Tionól. I commend the regulations to the Assembly.”
“Finally, certain regulations on gatherings are amended so that the numbers that are permitted to participate do not include children who are aged 12 or under. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No. 6 ensures that outdoor venues where intoxicating liquor may be consumed are now subject to the same requirements as inserted by amendment No. 5 of the No. 2 regulations. It does, however, provide an exemption for places of worship. <BR /> <BR />Finally, the third motion. Amendment No. 7 ensures that movement is permitted in such premises to access a smoking area for the purposes of avoiding injury or illness, to escape a risk of harm or to provide emergency or medical assistance. An exemption is provided for residents of hotels or guesthouses.”
“The group considered the risks that are associated with certain activities, such as singing and dancing, and the effects of loud music. I will outline for Members the changes that have been brought about by the amendments. <BR /> <BR />I will begin with amendment No. 5, which came into effect on 23 September 2020. It placed requirements on venues where alcohol may be consumed in respect of music, dancing, risk assessments, seating, consumption of food and drink, and the collection and sharing of visitor information. It also made it an offence for a person who organises or operates a gathering not to comply with the relevant conditions, and further required that person to provide a risk assessment and an account of the measures that are being taken on request.”
“As you aware, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, the most recent amendments to the regulations were announced in the Chamber last week. Members had an opportunity to probe and scrutinise them before they were made. I believe that Members will agree that those most recent amendments have moved us on considerably. It is within that context that I bring forward amendments No. 5, No. 6 and No. 7 to the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (No. 2) Regulations. <BR /> <BR />With your permission, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I will focus my remarks exclusively on the amendments that are at the centre of the debate. Amendments No. 5, No. 6 and No. 7 to the regulations came about following the establishment of a cross-departmental working group on entertainment issues.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle. Éirím leis an rún a chur chun cinn. I beg to move”
“We have demonstrated before that we can do it. Ní neart go cur le chéile. I am confident that we will do so again. <BR /> <BR />Molaim an rún agus na rialacháin don Tionól. I commend the regulations to the Assembly.”
“<BR /> <BR />This is a challenging time for us all. All Executive Ministers from our five main parties are agreed on the need for increased unity of purpose and integrated modes of working. The danger of this new unfolding context should not be underestimated. We will have to rely on new levels of community and political resilience in the time ahead. That will place new demands on all levels of government. As political representatives from all parties, we will each need to be focused on what actually matters regarding our fight back against COVID-19 in the Assembly Chamber, in our scrutiny Committees, at Executive meetings and in separate working structures with our partner agencies. In the coming weeks and months, we will all have to play our role in a whole-of-government and whole-of-society effort to help to suppress the virus.”
“All of this shows that the landscape today is quite different from when the amendment on soft-play areas was made. For example, on 10 September, when the Executive made the decision, 599 individuals had tested positive in the previous seven days. Yesterday, that figure was 3,630, which is an increase of over 500%. Therefore, in recognition of the challenges for soft-play areas, the Executive published guidance on 28 September. That guidance informed the owners and operators of the ongoing legal restrictions and requirements. It also offered advice for businesses, including the steps that they can take to reopen and operate in a manner that minimises the risk of transmission. We encourage all soft-play areas to consider that guidance and advice carefully and to be particularly vigilant at this time.”
“Once it is safe, the restrictions will be eased in line with advice from our Chief Medical Officer (CMO) and our Chief Scientific Adviser (CSA).”
“<BR /> <BR />While attending the North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC) sectoral meeting on health last Friday, I emphasised the need to ensure that all the required capacities in testing, PPE, ICU and bed capacity were available in this subregion of the island. It reinforces the need for increased North/South coordination and, indeed, a two-island approach. <BR /> <BR />Measann an Feidhmeannas go bhfuil na srianta sin riachtanach agus in ord agus in eagar. Ní mór dúinn feidhmiú le tras-seoladh na paindéime seo a shárú. The Executive consider those measures to be necessary and proportionate. We must act now to curb the transmission of the virus. I assure Members that those measures will be in place for only as long as it is considered necessary.”
“6 on 28 September. <BR /> <BR />Members will also be aware of the restricted opening hours for hospitality venues. A closing time of 11.00 pm has been applied to the hospitality sector with effect from last Thursday. Those measures were brought into effect through amendment No. 7 to the regulations on 1 October and will be debated by the Assembly shortly. Most recently, additional restrictions have been placed on those who live and work in the Derry City and Strabane council area. None of those decisions has been taken lightly, and they have been based on the latest scientific evidence and advice, but the escalating situation in Donegal and the Derry City and Strabane council area gives us all great cause for concern.”
“It is recognised by every Minister that we have entered a new and dangerous phase of this health emergency. All Ministers from our five main parties are agreed that this changing situation requires us to reset our regional Government's approach to tackling COVID-19 in the coming period. <BR /> <BR />Evidence from the test, trace and protect programme tells us that a significant number of COVID cases are being acquired through household contacts and informal interactions within the community. In response to that, further restrictions have been imposed on gatherings in domestic settings — initially on a postcode basis, and then extended to all households. They were brought into effect through amendment No. 4 to the No. 2 regulations. Restrictions imposed on indoor venues were then extended to outdoor venues through amendment No.”
“Throughout Ireland, a total of 53,908 confirmed cases have been recorded. To date, 2,395 deaths have been caused by the virus throughout the island. <BR /> <BR />From the outset, the behaviour and pathway of the pandemic has been similar across Ireland. However, levels of community transmission and confirmed cases of infection in the North have remained as a factor of that island-wide pattern. That, however, has now changed. Tá athrú ollmhór ann anois, agus tá cúrsaí ag dul in olcas ó thuaidh. Notwithstanding the deteriorating situation in the South, it is deeply alarming to note that, per head of population, the levels of community transmission and infection in this jurisdiction now exceed what is happening there. Our power-sharing Executive have discussed that new, disturbing context.”
“Over the past week, in the context of stable testing, there has been a marked increase in new positive cases, along with a progressive rise in COVID-19 hospital patients, which are now close to 25% of peak levels during wave 1. The R number is clearly above 1 for new cases and hospital admissions, and has been for a number of weeks. <BR /> <BR />The First Minister made a statement to the Assembly last Tuesday. Since then, there has been a further increase in the daily number of people testing positive. Yesterday, the number was 616, and today that number is 669. Unfortunately, there has also been further deaths, bringing the deal toll to 585. Yesterday, there were 64 COVID patients in hospitals across the North. Today, there are 85, with 13 in intensive care. The current number of confirmed cases in the South of Ireland is 38,549.”
“The decision to reopen soft-play areas came into effect over three weeks ago, and much has changed since then. <BR /> <BR />Ní mór dúinn ár machnamh a dhéanamh ar an rún atá os ár gcomhair i dtaca leis na cúrsaí reatha is déanaí. Caithfimid an comhthéacs reatha a chur san áireamh i gcónaí. It is therefore important to consider the motion in the context of recent developments. As has been repeatedly emphasised in these debates, we need to take account of context at all times, and levels of community transmission, continuous scientific analysis and due regard for societal and economic recovery are all relevant to the context in which decisions need to understood and agreed.”
“The decision to exempt soft-play areas from closure was agreed on the basis of the most up-to-date medical and scientific evidence at the time and on the stipulation that all relevant public health guidance and mitigating measures be implemented in advance of reopening. <BR /> <BR />The Executive considered the reopening of soft-play areas to provide the balance in retaining livelihoods in the sector, whilst improving family life. It is hoped that restoring a sense of normality for children, as well as providing them with a controlled space in which to develop their social skills, will help to increase their well-being. That amendment followed the reopening of other key spaces for children, which was catered for in the original revisions to the regulations in July 2020. Those included summer schemes and playgrounds.”
“2) regulations were subject to a number of amendment regulations, some of which have already been laid in the Assembly by the Health Minister. The first amendments to the (No. 2) regulations were made on 7 August. Those allowed certain venues to reopen under specified circumstances, including theatres or concert halls for rehearsals or live recordings without an audience. Nightclubs, conference halls, conference facilities and soft-play areas remained subject to closure, however. <BR /> <BR />The amendment (No. 3) regulations, which are the specific and singular focus of today's debate, removed soft-play areas from those businesses, service providers and premises subject to closure and allowed them to reopen on 14 September.”
“May I just note your opening remarks, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle? They offer very timely and appropriate guidance on the progress of the debate. <BR /> <BR />The motion before the Assembly relates to the amendment (No. 3) regulations to the Heath Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (No. 2) Regulations. Members will recall that the (No. 2) regulations were made on 23 July. They revoked and replaced the original health protection regulations, including all the previous amendments made to them. The (No. 2) regulations required the closure of certain businesses, services and premises listed in the schedule, except for limited permitted uses. <BR /> <BR />Prior to the motion before us today, the (No.”
“The Member will be aware that article 71 has been enshrined in legislation with a view to effectively providing for lawful discrimination in the employment of teachers in both the controlled and maintained sectors. TEO has responsibility for bringing forward the relevant legislation for amendment, but, clearly, the Department of Education would have significant input and opinion on what those kinds of amendments could or should look like in the future. I can advise the Member that a meeting is scheduled for next week, where officials from TEO will engage with officials from the Department of Education to take forward that discussion.”
“Yes, I can. The employers' guidance was designed to assist employers to follow best practice and is aimed at reducing barriers to employment and enhancing the reintegration of those with conflict-related convictions. This week, junior Minister Lyons and I met members of the review panel for an update on their work. We had a very positive and informative discussion with panel members. We recognise that a lot of good work has been and continues to be taken forward. However, whilst there have been key successes and progress in a number of areas to date, including intervention on individual cases, several issues remain to be addressed. Progressing that work and continuing to engage with the review panel will be a priority in the period ahead.”
“There are several potential amendments to the Fair Employment and Treatment (NI) Order 1998 being considered by various business areas in the Executive Office. Those extend to the inclusion of monitoring information as regards nationality and ethnic origin; the repeal or amendment of the teachers' exception in article 71, which was created in 1976 to address the imbalance in employment opportunities for teachers; and an amendment to article 2(4) to reflect the changed circumstances of a post-conflict society, enabling ex-prisoners and their families to transition into making a positive contribution to society.”
“Perhaps, however, one of the things that we should try to do next year — I invite the Member to take this point on board for some further reflection — is rather than descend into the vortex of continually and relentlessly fighting over issues of the past, we should look towards the centenary of partition as an opportunity to develop a new dialogue and discourse in society about how we can build for the future.”
“I thank the Member for that question. The reality, as the Member well knows, is that we all have narratives around our past and the conflict that we have lived through. For the past 100 years, those narratives have been in conflict with each other. What we need to do, particularly in the context of this mandate of renewed power-sharing, is to come together on the basis of respecting different narratives and to agree to disagree. We will not agree on the past, but we can do our level best, collectively and inclusively, to try to build a united future for everyone in society. <BR /> <BR />Next year marks the centenary of partition in our island and it can throw up the prospect of a very contested year where we disagree vehemently about what happened in the past.”
“It is my firm view that all Ministers and, I hope, all parties that are members of our power-sharing Executive will share the common ambition of taking forward and implementing that strategy successfully, so that we can build a genuine, shared, inclusive and united society.”
“The Member, of course, will be aware that we have a five-party power-sharing coalition and that his party is an integral part of that coalition. We have commitments in relation to taking NDNA forward that rest at the very heart of the restoration of power sharing. We have the racial equality strategy 2015-2025, and the work that is involved in addressing racism in our society must be seen as part of the overall package for eradicating intolerance and all forms of bigotry in our society, regardless of the source or against which section of society that is targeted. <BR /> <BR />The work that we have in hand in the context of that strategy continues apace.”
“I am committed to working with Executive colleagues to bring forward practical proposals on an anti-sectarian pledge for all public representatives, in a matter that delivers and is consistent with our NDNA commitments. I am committed to engaging and working with all Assembly colleagues, who are committed to exploring how we may collectively make a stand against sectarianism as the basis for building an inclusive, shared and better united future for all of us.”
“Gabhaim buíochas leis an chomhalta as ucht an cheist sin a chur. A whole-society approach is required to tackle the scourge of sectarianism in all its manifestations in our society. I am very mindful of and fully supportive of the commitments in New Decade, New Approach to ending sectarianism, which include an enhanced strategic focus in the Programme for Government on ending sectarianism; a re-affirmation of support for the right to freedom from sectarianism, sectarian harassment and intimidation; a wish to see sectarianism given legal expression as hate crime; and a commitment that the Executive should formulate and require all public representatives to commit to anti-sectarian pledge. <BR /> <BR />There is a particular responsibility on all public representatives to lead by example.”
“Ministers in the Executive have a shared commitment to ending sectarianism. Positive work is ongoing across the Together: Building a United Community Strategy to tackle sectarianism and other forms of intolerance in our society. <BR /> <BR />In May, the Department of Justice appointed Judge Desmond Marrinan to carry out an independent review of hate crime legislation here. Judge Marrinan is due to provide his final report to the Minister of Justice for consideration by the end of November. It is necessary to await the outcome of that review before further decisions can be taken on a way forward.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. I am content that the clarity that will be introduced on cross-cutting issues will provide the reassurance that I hope that the Member will be content with. <BR /> <BR />He also asked a question about the Aarhus convention, which requires consultation on a range of environmental matters. This Bill reaffirms the position of decision-making on planning pre-Buick. <BR /> <BR />I want to conclude by commending all Members for their contribution to the debate. I hope that my fellow Minister and I have done our best to allay concerns, provide additional information and persuade Members that this is the correct position to take. I appreciate the fraternal manner in which the debate has taken place. Mar gheall air sin, molaim-se an Bille don Tionól.”
“He suggested that the pandemic was being used to camouflage some sort of sleight of hand. I disagree with the Member on that. I do not see where he is coming from. We will agree to disagree politically, but, on this particular point, I just do not understand his logic. However, he does raise —.”
“I understand the Member's concerns about silo working. That is something that the Executive, on a collaborative basis, need to ensure does not happen. I believe that the legislation, if it is embraced in the correct spirit, will go some way to ensuring that we do not revert to silo working. <BR /> <BR />Gerry Carroll was the last Member to speak in the debate. He pointed out multiple concerns that had been raised with him over the past 24 hours about the imminence of final decision-making in relation to the legislation. He said that he does not believe that the Bill remedies the lack of transparency in our planning process. I have already made the point that we always need to do better in respect of scrutiny and transparency in planning issues — and much more.”
“That this is going to incentivise silo working in the Executive.”
“No, Mr Wells, I will not give way. I am trying to bring the debate to a conclusion. You have had a fair crack of the whip several times. <BR /> <BR />I disagree with the Member that this is going to incentivise —.”
“No, I will not, Mr Wells. <BR /> <BR />Miss Woods is right to emphasise the need for better and more collaborative working Even though her party is not a member of the Executive, it has a challenge function to perform in these institutions to ensure that that better, collaborative working is continuously maximised and achieved, and, to that extent, I draw a correlation to Mr Beattie's position, because, while we disagree, I absolutely affirm and agree with his right, whether as an individual MLA or on behalf of his party, to provide the challenge function in this debate. However, I agree —.”
“The point is to overlook the fact that the scrutiny process to which the Minister for Infrastructure will be subject, on any issues that he or she brings forward at any time in the future, including addressing the extant issues in their inbox. <BR /> <BR />I point the Member again to the context of recent months; that is not camouflage, that is reality. Everybody here has lived it, and it has put a cart and horse through our normal approach to good government and how we make decisions.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. I am sure that his own Minister, in our power-sharing Government and under the advice of his party leader, will ensure that those remarks are passed on to the Executive to be heard collectively. <BR /> <BR />Rachel Woods suggested that the legislation is not about planning and she criticised the planning process. I agree with her. I am on record as saying, in the Chamber and outside, that every aspect of our governmental process, including planning, which is so essential, needs to be further democratised and subject to greater levels of transparency and scrutiny.”
“I thank the Member for the intervention and she is right, but, again, I made the point that the issue of amendment to the ministerial code will be required to be subject to scrutiny by the Assembly, and that provides Members with an opportunity to assess whether those amendments are, in fact, robust and effective or require further alteration.”
“For the first time, we are seeing a whole-of-government focus on the climate crisis that affects our society and our global village. She asked "why now?" for this legislation and not at an earlier stage. With the indulgence of Rachel Woods, I hope that she accepts that I have tried to address that. She raised the issue of the ministerial codes and amending it subsequent to the legislation being passed. As I explained for a number of Members, it is not possible to make amendments to the ministerial code unless and until the amendments are consistent with the nature of the law that they are designed to reflect.”
“Of course, as has been said throughout today, yesterday and previously, everyone is entitled to their opinion, including lawyers. You have posed many questions, but, notably, you have not answered the question relating to the logic of the legislation in the absence of a Programme for Government, which, I explained earlier, was part of the context that led us to the invidious situation where we were absent the legislation that was required to ensure that we could, in fact, proceed with the planning issues that remain extant. <BR /> <BR />Rachel Woods spoke and, as she has done before, reiterated her concerns about accelerated passage; she did so in a very succinct and clear way. I agree that climate issues are, and can be, of a cross-cutting nature. The sentiment of that is reflected in New Decade, New Approach.”
“People will make of that statement what they will, but it is absolutely immaterial to this discussion. You repeated the view that the Bill should be parked because you are persuaded by the legal opinion of some. Of some.”
“It betrays more about the approach that you have brought to the debate than about any serious thought or consideration to ensuring that we have good legislation. In fact, you are not too bad yourself, Mr Wells, at making long-winded statements and filibustering. You made a fair good fist of filibustering your way through yesterday and, by the appearance of things, today. <BR /> <BR />The context of the legislation has been set out. You will also know, due to your concerns and criticisms about the use of accelerate passage, that the scheduling of the Bill is a function of the Assembly of which you are a Member. Characteristic of your approach to the debate was your suggestion that some members of the DUP preferred to speak to you instead of their party officers.”
“I thank both Members for their interventions. Go díreach chun seo a rá mar Ghaeilgeoir agus mar Ghael leat, ionas go bhfuilimid ar an aon leathanach amháin. Ní ghlacaimse ar chor ar bith gur cheart go gcuirfí suas comharthaí sráide ná comharthaí bóithre in áit ar bith nuair nach bhfuil an pobail áitiúil toilteanach glacadh leis na comharthaí sin. Go díreach chun sin a rá leat. I will briefly translate: as a Gaeilgeoir, for not one moment would I countenance the notion of erecting Irish-language signs or bilingual signage in locations where they would be against the will of the local community, so it is entirely fallacious for you to conflate your concerns about the Bill with the issue of Irish-language signage.”
“Excuse me, Mr Wells. You have an awful habit of trying to make an intervention when I am halfway through a sentence. <BR /> <BR />I was trying to say that he once more raised his concern. as he has done throughout this debate and as he did yesterday, about the haste of the Bill's passage and expressed misgivings about the manner in which that is happening.”
“I thank Mr Aiken for his intervention. I have instanced two of the examples that will require amendment and will be subject to discussion and will need to brought to the Assembly for its assent. In the event that Members feel that there is a requirement for a more expansive amendment to the ministerial code, the opportunity will exist through scrutiny and debate in the Chamber for that to be done. <BR /> <BR />Jim Wells then spoke and conflated his concerns about the legislation with the potential for a Sinn Féin, SDLP or Alliance Minister to erect Irish-language signage without community support. Once again, he raised the haste of the Bill's passage. I absolutely respect his democratic right to do so.”
“No, Mr Wells. I want to continue with my response to Mr Aiken. <BR /> <BR />Mr Wells's intervention was on the very point on which I left off. The examples that will require to be addressed in the context of changes to the ministerial code relate, for example, to those statutory functions and specifically to the provision of the exemption of certain planning decisions from the cross-cutting issues affecting the Executive. Mr Aiken, echoing what Doug Beattie said, was emphatic about seeking further delay to the legislation. Like Mr Wells, he suggested that there was no valid basis for not allowing further delay.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. Again, he misses my point. We are attempting to create a situation in which we are in a position come the autumn and early winter to address the extant planning issues that have been congesting the Department for Infrastructure. Amendments to the ministerial code need to be brought to the Assembly for agreement. They must reflect the law, Mr Wells; otherwise, they will have no standing. You, in fact, are attempting to take the cart and put it before the horse.”
“Yes, I accept that the Member has his own specific concerns about the legislation. He has made that clear. You made fulsome contributions yesterday. You tabled your amendments. Regrettably, from your point of view, those amendments were not agreed, because they did not secure the majority required. You did not persuade Members that the amendments would be of benefit to the quality or the substance of the Bill.”
“It has cross-cutting ramifications, and the Executive are focused on dealing with those discussions collectively. <BR /> <BR />Steve Aiken began by expressing his concern that the legislation is bad and has long-term consequences, in his view, on the basis that, if bad legislation is passed, there can be unforeseen circumstances with negative results. He expressed doubts about what changes to the ministerial code would entail. I have attempted to address that issue with regard to remarks made by other Members. I make the point again: we are not in a position to amend the ministerial code, which will require amendment, until we have changed the law. As I said a short while ago, however, our Assembly will have the ability to approve the amendments.”