Linda Dillon
Mid Ulster · Sinn Féin · Northern Ireland
“It is important to have that acknowledgement for the sake of history — so that the generations who come after us will understand what happened to you and what you went through. It is also important for our present and future: we must make sure that what happened to those women, girls and children never happens again.”
“I begin by offering the apologies of my colleague Carál Ní Chuilín, who cannot be here today owing to ill health. Carál has been very much invested in the work on the legislation. The Bill is very important to her, given the work that she does in the Assembly and the people with whom she has personally worked and engaged over many years.”
“My colleague Áine is the Member who probably comes closest to having a true understanding of what you have had to live with and endure, and continue to live with and endure, because it has affected, and will affect, you all your life, and we know that those effects are transgenerational. I acknowledge that.”
“We can never allow that to happen. <BR /> <BR />You showed bravery by speaking up. You spoke up, yes, so that people would know what had happened to you, but you also spoke up so that it would not happen to others.”
“Some lived to see the beginning of the campaign but not the Bill getting to this stage. Many did not even see the beginning of the campaign and did not believe that, in their lifetime — or anyone else's lifetime, for that matter — there would be an acknowledgement of what happened to them.”
“I apologise for not being in the House from the beginning of the statement and thank you for your latitude on that. <BR /> <BR />Thank you, Minister. You have outlined some of the benefits that Waterways Ireland ownership can bring to waterways and local communities.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,578 lines we hold for Linda Dillon, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 26 of 32.
“Nobody in the House can fail to know that data collection, training and reporting on anything, be it policy or legislation — it does not matter what it is — are vital, because resources follow information and statistics. If we do not have the statistics, we will not get the resources. We already know that from some of the groups and organisations that have highlighted the fact that there is a lack of resourcing directed towards them. Rachel Woods will speak to some of that later. She has raised, on numerous occasions, the fact that there are groups and organisations, particularly from the migrant population, that do not get adequate funding because we do not have the data and the statistics. It is important that we look to data collection. Again, the reporting feeds into all that.”
“Whilst there are limitations to it, and I accept that, hopefully, when it comes to the roll-out, it will help us in flagging up some of the issues, problems or stumbling blocks. That can only be a good thing. For me, Operation Encompass is an absolutely vital part of it. I welcome that the Minister intends to bring forward an amendment at Further Consideration Stage. Again, I believe that the Minister's amendment will further improve this amendment and the legislation. Again, that can only be a positive outcome. <BR /> <BR />I just want to say that I will support amendment No 19, which provides for a minor amendment to the wording. <BR /> <BR />I will now speak to amendment Nos 20, 21 and 24. I do not intend to go over the issues that the Chair has already highlighted.”
“I know that we have lots of brilliant teachers, but the truth is that, sometimes, they are under so much pressure trying to do what they have to do that they forget those things, and this might be a way of reminding them. I am sure that lots of teachers in our schools do not realise how many children in their classroom come from homes where there is domestic abuse occurring daily. I have no doubt about that. This could potentially make a massive difference to children's lives. At the end of the day, that is what we are about. <BR /> <BR />The PSNI has said that it wants to do it, and I welcome that. I also welcome the Education Minister's move to roll out the pilot project.”
“Around the time that we were discussing that, I saw a quote on social media from a teacher. I do not often quote from social media, because I do not like it, to be honest, but this is a really good quote. The teacher said, "If you meet a child at the gate who is coming in late, you can make a difference to their life by, instead of shouting, 'Why are you late, Johnny? What kept you?', saying, 'Are you OK, Johnny? Is everything all right?'. You do not know what that child is going through or why they are late to school." I thought that that was very relevant. It certainly had an impact on me. I would love it if more teachers thought like that.”
“As the Chair outlined, they may not have done their homework or have brought a lunch with them. Teachers will challenge them because that is what they do. When a young person at school has not done what is expected of them, on many occasions, teachers challenge them without knowing what that child has been through the night before. Earlier, we talked about adverse impacts. It would make an immeasurable difference to that child if someone in the school were to ask, "Are you OK?" or "Do you need lunch?", said, "Do not worry if you have not done your homework" or "So what if you do not have the correct uniform?", or asked, "Would you like to go to another room for half an hour?".”
“<BR /> <BR />I am delighted that the Committee gave its support to Operation Encompass. While it might seem a very small part of the Bill — in some ways, it is, and we were concerned that it would be found not to be within its scope because it also falls within the responsibility of the Education Minister — the fact that it was found to be within the scope of the Bill means that we will now be able to deliver that for children. We outlined earlier in the debate how important it is that we look after children who are impacted by domestic abuse. That is a really important element because, when a child witnesses or is a victim of a domestic abuse incident, and they go into school the next morning, they may well not have slept all night. They may not have been in their own home.”
“I also asked whether we could have further conversations about what it was and how it worked so that I could explore with the Policing Board the potential for how it could be delivered. I did so at every opportunity at the Policing Board, but I was told repeatedly that it could not be delivered because of issues around the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and information sharing. The phrase that was used continually was that there was a "legislative gap". On numerous occasions, I asked what the legislative gap was so that we could, hopefully, address it. I never got an answer to that. Therefore, I took the opportunity, when the Chief Constable came to us, knowing that the Bill was coming forward, to ask him about Operation Encompass and what the legislative gap was so that we could, hopefully, incorporate that in the legislation.”
“I do not intend to repeat much of what the Chairperson has said. However, I would like to thank the Minister for not moving amendment No 15. That has been helpful to us this evening. As the Chairperson outlined, we are certainly open to working with the Minister on an amendment at Further Consideration Stage. Again, that would be helpful to us in making good legislation. As I outlined earlier, at the end of the day, that is what we want to do here. <BR /> <BR />I want to focus a little on amendment No 18. As the Chairperson said, I raised the issue of Operation Encompass repeatedly. I first heard of it at a meeting with the Safeguarding Board when I was a member of the Policing Board. I was not really sure what it was, but it sounded good. I asked the board to send me more information.”
“I absolutely agree, and, as the Minister outlined, she is open to the argument. We are pushing at an open door, so I hope that we have a fuller discussion on that issue. There are also those who have had to say, "I'm going to have to give up my job and go onto benefits. That's the only way that I'm going to protect myself, my family, my children". We know that that happens. There is a cost to the public purse, somewhere along the line, when we push people to that stage. <BR /> <BR />That is our position on group 2.”
“As I said, we are open to having that conversation with the Minister to address the issue, because the threshold for people to access legal aid is probably going to be too high. From my understanding, and from what Miss Woods told me, it is similar to accessing help in relation to non-molestation orders, and I outlined that that is a challenge. The threshold is probably too high. <BR /> <BR />The one effect that we are hoping that it might have is that, if people think that their partner, ex-partner or other person will have access to legal aid, it may well prevent them from taking them to court continually. They do that as a further means of abuse. It is financial abuse and mental —.”
“Very often, it is the working poor and people whom other Members already talked about who are affected. <BR /> <BR />Paul Frew spoke about the cost being £2,900. For some people, it might as well be £2 million. If you have not got it, you have not got it, so it does not matter how much it is. I can certainly speak from experience, not on this issue of legal cases, but I know many people — my family included and people whom I care about — who have been in that situation. If you do not have money, it does not matter whether it is £30 or £300,000 — you do not have it, and that is it. That is a real issue. <BR /> <BR />The Committee would probably have liked more time to scope this out and to delve further. I told the officials on Thursday that we would be open to amendments at Further Consideration Stage if it would improve this.”
“I do not think that it serves the purpose that I want it to serve, much like I fear that the amendment on protection orders and notices does not go far enough. I really am concerned that amendment No 14 does not go far enough, however. To be fair to Ms Woods, she accepts that she would have liked it to go further. I agree with the Minister that the issue needs to be dealt with in the round. In the absence, however, of something else — something better — I feel that we have to support it, so we will be supporting amendment No 14 tonight. I would certainly welcome discussions with the Minister on the issue, as, I am sure, would other Committee members. I do not doubt the Minister's sincerity when she says that it is an issue that she wants to deal with in the round, because it does go much deeper.”
“I absolutely welcome that intent. If it is included in that Bill, it will resolve all our issues. We are concerned that the amendment may not serve the purpose that I and the Committee want it to serve, so we look forward to seeing what comes forward. I will be supporting the Committee amendment tonight, however. <BR /> <BR />I have concerns about amendment No 14, and I have raised those concerns with Rachel Woods. To be honest, I have been back and forth on this one with different Members, including Rachel and Members from our party. I have spoken to other parties, and I have listened to what the Minister had to say. Again, I have a lot of sympathy for what the Minister says about the amendment. My main issue with it is that, as Mr Frew outlined, it does not go far enough.”
“Although I take on board and accept all of what the Minister said, and, indeed, I have sympathy with what she said about how difficult and challenging a job her Department has, we as a Committee feel that the provision is too important not to be in the Bill. At the beginning of Committee Stage, one of the issues that I personally raised was that of non-molestation orders, the difficulties with them, the difficulties that people seem to have in accessing them and the fact that, within weeks of being given a non-molestation order, a person is back in court to get it removed. My hope is that protection orders and notices give some relief to victims. I hope that that is what they deliver. I urge the Minister to bring forward such a provision. She has already said that she will bring it forward in the miscellaneous provisions Bill.”
“Mr Frew has already said that we may have to come back to the issue. I hope that we do not have to come back to it too soon. In our comments on reporting and oversight, we will probably talk more about the importance, if we indeed have to come back to it, of coming back to it based on good-quality information. That is why the amendments that we will speak to later will be so important. <BR /> <BR />We also support the Minister's amendment No 12. It is a very welcome introduction to the Bill, in that it provides the meaning of "ill treatment". <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 13 is a Committee amendment, and it is about domestic abuse protection orders and notices.”
“In fairness to the Minister, however, to deal with it in a more rounded manner, she would have to go outside the scope of the Bill and outside the competency of her Department, because this needs to be done in conjunction with the Health Department. The Minister and her colleague in the Health Department, Robin Swann, have come up the most suitable solution. It is not a perfect solution, but the law is very rarely perfect. <BR /> <BR />That leads me on to some of my other comments. We want to get the best legislation possible, and we have made that clear. Not the Minister, not one Member, not any officials and not any Committee staff who have worked on the Bill do not want to see the best legislation, but it will not be perfect. It just will not, and we have to accept that.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, for the opportunity to speak on the amendments in group 2. The Chair and the Minister referred to bullying. This is anti-bullying week. We should acknowledge that in the Chamber tonight. We do not need to go into detail; we have heard on many occasions on the Floor about the impact of bullying. Domestic abuse and coercive control are bullying by another name. I want to make that point and remind Members that it is anti-bullying week, that we should speak out and that, at every opportunity, we should make people aware of it and the fact that we will do what we can to prevent bullying. The Bill is part of that. <BR /> <BR />The Chair outlined the purpose and intention of amendment Nos 9 and 11, which relate to changing the age from 18 to 16. It is not a perfect solution, as Sinéad Bradley outlined.”
“Will the Minister agree that one of the specific examples of that is when the Hart brothers talked about the point where one of them had a nut allergy and their father brought nuts into the home and sat them on the kitchen shelf, knowing that their mother would know what it meant? That would not be enough to make a case against somebody, but, along with all the other actions, it certainly would. In that circumstance, it was very clear what that was about, but that would not be the case in every home where somebody had a nut allergy and nuts were brought in.”
“Will the Member agree with me that a child can also become a victim because when they see something, it becomes normalised, and they think that if it was good enough for their mummy or daddy, it is good enough for them?”
“I thank the Member for taking an intervention. Does he agree that the issue with clause 9, which was outlined by Sinéad Bradley, is highlighted by the Hart case? We probably all use the Hart case as an example because they are among the very few who survived to tell the tale. Very often, in a murder-suicide, the entire family is killed. The end of coercive control situations can often be the death of those who have been coercively controlled.”
“In particular, I will speak about Operation Encompass, which I raised during my first days on the Committee and have raised at the Policing Board over the past couple of years. It is vital that we address that gap. Again, I will not speak to that at this point, because it is more relevant to later groups of amendments. <BR /> <BR />We will support the remaining amendments, which are amendment Nos 8, 10, 16 and 17. That ends my contribution on this group of amendments.”
“This is a Department of Justice Bill, so I will not go into any detail on that. We do need a cross-departmental approach to be taken, however. We need every single Minister and Member of the Assembly to take it on as the serious issue that it is. In the way in which we have addressed the legislation, we have shown that we take it seriously. The Committee has said that, even when, hopefully, the legislation has passed, it will still view this issue as a priority in the future. For that reason, we will support Rachel Woods's amendment No 7 to clause 9. <BR /> <BR />The Committee had a particular focus on the child aggravator and the adverse impact on the child as a result of domestic abuse. I will speak more to that later.”
“I am sure that other Committee members will talk more about clause 9. Rachel Woods tabled amendments to it, and Paul Frew added his name to them, so I am sure that they will speak extensively about it. Clause 9 was of real concern to us, and we wanted to ensure that we got it right. It is about the impact on children, not only at the time of the incident but for the future. There is an impact on children who live in a home where there is domestic abuse, even if they do not witness it and even if they do not realise that they have been affected. Whether they see the acts of domestic abuse, those acts will have an impact on them. They will suffer harm and adverse effects that will last into the future. <BR /> <BR />The Chair of the Committee is right to say that the issue is cross-departmental.”
“For every single person who suffers domestic violence, many others will be affected. The Bill is about trying to embrace that, particularly the effect on children. I will talk more about that when speaking to later amendments. <BR /> <BR />We will support amendment Nos 2 and 3, which are minor amendments to terminology. We will support Rachel Woods's amendment No 4, which would make a minor change to wording. We queried whether it would add anything to clause 9, but it certainly does not detract from it, and putting "or threatened to direct" explicitly in the Bill will do no harm. For that reason, we will support the amendment. <BR /> <BR />I thank the Minister for saying that she will not move her amendment Nos 5 and 6 following conversations with the Committee on Thursday.”
“I will speak to the first group of amendments. We oppose amendment No 1, which is Mr Allister's amendment, on the basis of the Committee's position on the issue. I also oppose Mr Allister's opposition to clause 3. These clauses go to the very heart of what the Bill is about: addressing the gaps and ensuring that, where we did not have legislation before to protect the most vulnerable in our society, we will have legislation. I will not go over the numbers of people who suffer and report domestic abuse, particularly in this time of COVID. Those statistics have been borne out, and I am sure that they will be borne out again later in the debate. It is not about statistics. This is about not only every single victim of abuse but their children, their family and everybody around them.”
“From the bottom of my heart, I thank all on the Committee, the Minister, the officials and the Committee staff, all of whom were a great help. They certainly helped guide me through this legislation. I go back to the witnesses, because it is from them that we get the information that helps us decide which clauses and amendments we will support.”
“I do not propose to repeat everything that the Chair of the Committee said. I concur with many of his comments, particularly in thanking those who came before the Committee, both the organisations and groups and the individuals. I particularly thank the individuals who bore witness to their experiences, which was not easy for them to do. To be perfectly honest, it was not easy to listen to either; it was very difficult because those are people's very personal and very difficult experiences. We were tasked with the job of scrutinising legislation that will, hopefully, address those issues for people in the future. <BR />It was a big responsibility for the Committee. As somebody dealing with legislation for the first time, and for it to be such important legislation, I certainly felt the weight of that responsibility.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I want some clarification. To be honest, I really would have appreciated it if the Member had come and made some of those arguments to us, as Committee members, as Rachel Woods did with her amendments and the Minister and her officials did with departmental amendments, because it is helpful to be able to ask questions and have those conversations before we get to this point. With regard to the Minister's analogy about drink-driving, where is the harm when the drink-driver has not actually done any harm? They have still driven when they have been over the legal alcohol limit.”
“The Minister has highlighted some of the issues that are of greatest concern to us. She spoke about the harassment and intimidation legislation that is available at the moment. We know that the sentences for those offences can be quite lenient. Can the Minister give some assurance that the sentences related to the stalking Bill will reflect the seriousness of the crime?”
“I thank the Minister for taking an intervention. Does she agree that those independent reports must be given, not all the weight, but greater weight than reports from those who might have a vested interest in the process?”
“I thank the Member for taking the intervention. I agree with Rachel Woods. In scrutinising this Bill we will listen to many witnesses. I would be happy to meet the Member to hear his side of the argument, along with my colleague on the Committee and anybody else who wants to be part of that conversation, because we do want to make the best law and we want to ensure that these issues are dealt with. I would like to hear some alternatives as to how we make this process less difficult for those alleged victims.”
“I thank the Member for taking an intervention. Does he agree that we must ask the Minister to provide assurances on how that will be prevented from happening?”
“When the Minister came up with this paper about the excluded, who call themselves "excluded" because they have been excluded since March — these people have not been waiting for a couple of weeks — did she engage with them to ensure that the paper meets their needs?”
“I appreciate the Minister's answer, and the fact that we will be able to get online access to those reports. Does the Minister's Department have a strategy or funding coming forward for short stretches of footpaths in rural areas? Such infrastructure would make a big difference for people being able to walk to school or football clubs. At this time, we are devoid of a strategy and, in many areas, any type of infrastructure.”
“Therefore, although the issue was not resolved in 2015, it has become clear that the case for further reform of committal proceedings is strong. My party, therefore, at this stage welcomes the Department moving on the issue. The changes are regarded as key to improving the speed of the justice system and delivering on the Executive's priorities outlined in NDNA.”
“The 2015 Act provided for more fundamental reforms to the committal process by allowing direct committal of an accused person from the Magistrates' Court to the Crown Court in certain circumstances without the need for the traditional committal hearing. It was considered throughout the 2015 Bill whether we should abolish the option to hear oral evidence from victims and witnesses at the traditional committal hearing in the Magistrates' Court. However, it did not receive sufficient support at that time. Since 2015, however, there has been a range of developments that have led to where we are today, and some of those have already been outlined. We had the Fresh Start panel report, the NI Audit Office report in 2018 on speeding up justice, the Gillen review, a number of CJINI reports and then NDNA.”
“<BR /> <BR />I am also keen to hear some figures from the Minister on the expected outcomes of the Bill. For example, we know that there is a major backlog of cases and that the time taken to deal with serious criminal cases is already far too high. We need to hear additional information on the figures. I accept that it is not all about the figures — it is very much about people — but we are a public body that uses public finances. We also have a real focus on shortening the time for cases going through court, so we need to see some of the figures. <BR /> <BR />The issue was, of course, raised in 2015 as part of the Justice Bill.”
“The Department, however, has a responsibility to ensure that victims are put at the front and centre of the Bill and any other measures that are designed to improve the system for them. I would like to think that, in developing the Bill, the Minister and her Department have engaged with victims and organisations that represent victims and that she has their support. <BR /> <BR />As a member of the Justice Committee, I am sure that I speak for other members of the Committee when I say that the best interests of victims and alleged victims will be our priority in scrutinising the legislation. I am certainly keen to engage with all, including those from a legal background and the Bar, who obviously have had some issues with previous Bills that have come before the House.”
“Apologies. <BR /> <BR />We, as a party, support the two main purposes of the Bill around removing the option of calling alleged victims and witnesses for oral evidence in advance of a trial and the issue around speeding up the time for progressing Crown Court cases. However, we will not take a final position without going through the scrutiny process. <BR /> <BR />It is vital that the wider justice system supports victims of crime at every stage of their journey through the system. The Bill is one piece of the puzzle of how we can do that by removing the need to give oral evidence more than once. That, along with shortening the time taken for that journey to be progressed are major cogs in the process of how we can properly support victims in the process.”
“Absolutely. It hangs over the heads not just of the perpetrators but of their families. Even where someone is guilty of something, their family has done nothing wrong. A protracted process does not help anyone in relation to those issues.”
“I accept what you say. That is why we will scrutinise the Bill as a Committee. We will speak to everybody during that process, not just to alleged victims but to those from a background such as yours, Mr Allister. I appreciate that you may have a different and more detailed understanding.”
“That can include the taking of oral evidence, as has already been referred to, from victims and witnesses, which means that they will have to give further oral evidence at a trial. There is a huge risk of retraumatisation. We have spoken on many occasions in the House about the need to support and look after victims and have a victim-centred approach to everything that we do. We should do whatever we can to reduce that trauma to victims, and I am hopeful that the committal Bill will go some way to dealing with that. The proposals to streamline —.”
“I assure you, a LeasCheann Comhairle, that you will not have to interrupt me: I will be finished before Question Time. <BR /> <BR />I thank the Minister for moving the Bill. As the Chair has outlined, it will be scrutinised in much greater detail as it progresses through the legislative process. It has been a steep learning curve for me. I have just been through the Domestic Abuse and Family Proceedings Bill, my first ever legislation. A number of pieces of legislation are coming through the Committee. That is a positive thing. It is what the House is for. We are here to try to make the best law that we can. <BR /> <BR />Committal proceedings are held to determine whether, in the case of more serious offences, there is sufficient evidence to require a defendant to stand trial.”
“As you have already outlined, Minister, the British Government, by their own rules, say that, if you create a policy, you must pay for it. As Mr Lyttle outlined, the victims have waited far too long. Can you ask, when you have that meeting, the NIO and, indeed, the British Secretary of State to meet the victims' groups? They have all requested meetings with him, and yet, to date, he has not responded to them.”
“Mid-Ulster has higher productivity per head than the average figure for the North. Given the importance and contribution of mid-Ulster to the economy, Mid Ulster District Council believes that Invest NI should establish an office presence in the area, particularly at a time when businesses of all sizes face unprecedented challenges from COVID-19 and Brexit. I commend the businesses in mid-Ulster for working with us to keep their businesses there. I call on the Department to give them the required support, which has been sadly lacking to date. <BR /> <BR />Several Members spoke about R&D and its importance. My question is this: where will the support for R&D come from in the absence of European funding? I have heard nothing to give me confidence that that support will be replaced.”
“The area boasts a world-class, high-growth cluster that manufactures at least 40% of the world's mobile-crushing and screening equipment. That cluster needs to be protected, supported and developed. <BR /> <BR />Manufacturing has been identified as a sector with a higher risk of pandemic-related recession, and large numbers of staff have been furloughed or laid off. Therefore, immediate and direct intervention is critical. We have asked DFE to take the lead in establishing a mid-Ulster manufacturing task force comprising key public and private stakeholders to protect the sector's economic and employment base. <BR /> <BR />We have the largest business base outside Belfast, and the area is recognised as the entrepreneurial capital of the North for business starts.”
“Invest NI needs to take forward the development of new sites urgently to address business need in mid-Ulster. I can cite examples of businesses being advised to move their premises to Belfast if they needed additional power supply, better broadband or bigger premises. It is simply not an acceptable strategy to move businesses out of an area where they have a skilled workforce and their suppliers are based. <BR /> <BR />I ask the Minister to work with her Executive colleague Nichola Mallon on that point, as it is recognised that there is a need for significant investment in mid-Ulster's road infrastructure; for example, in progressing the Cookstown and Dungannon bypasses. Infrastructure is the essential foundation for businesses to deliver employment, growth and economic prosperity.”
“The problem is particularly acute in Dungannon and can be clearly demonstrated in Granville industrial estate, one of the busiest and most economically successful of its kind across the North. The lack of service sites in mid-Ulster has a significant impact on the ability of operating businesses to grow and deliver investment and job creation in the local area.”
“Although the amendment was not accepted by the Speaker's Office, I call on the Minister to address that issue as part of her response to the motion. <BR /> <BR />The council, the MP and the MLAs have again had to be the driving force in delivering this is in our constituency, and although we are happy to do this, and it is our job to do so, it would be a much easier task if there were an effective overall strategy to link up with. The council has had to provide business parks where Invest NI has failed to do so, and we have had to fight to get power supply for expanding businesses. <BR /> <BR />One of the identified key constraints stifling the economic growth of mid-Ulster is the lack of industrial and economic lands for growing businesses.”
“Go raibh maith agat. It would future-proof the skills base and provide good and well-paid jobs, and it is something that the industry has said that it would welcome and that it needs. <BR /> <BR />Businesses, educationalists and the council have worked together to achieve the best possible economic strategy for the council district. I have had good feedback on the Department's apprenticeship recovery programme from those in the industry and from training providers. The model of engaging with industry and academia partners clearly works well, and I encourage the Minister to use models of best practice when developing a future skills strategy. <BR /> <BR />We tabled an amendment to the motion on the need to improve infrastructure as part of the economic strategy.”