Alban Maginness
North Belfast · Social Democratic and Labour Party · Northern Ireland
“I look at the Justice Committee, which was mentioned yesterday during the Justice Bill debate, and see it as an exemplar of how people can work together, despite their political differences, and create a political consensus in order to make worthwhile changes in the justice system.”
“I hope that, as I leave this place and a new mandate starts, I can relinquish the function of alchemist and that we will have a new dispensation in which we can, in fact, create that reconciliation, because the Assembly was created as a forum for reconciliation.”
“— people used to ask me what I did. I said that I was a fireman — a political fireman who put out political fires. That is what we did for the first five years or so: we put out political fires. I have become redundant, or semi-redundant, in relation to putting out political fires.”
“There is, indeed, a dark shadow over the Assembly as we prepare for the elections. The attack on Adrian Ismay was not just an attack on a prison officer; it was an attack on the Assembly, it was an attack on the political process and it was an attack on non-violence and peaceful politics.”
“I thank the representative of the Commission for her kind words. I have enjoyed working with Karen McKevitt and, indeed, with the Commission. In the programme, will there be an emphasis on dealing with legislation, particularly draft legislation? It is a process that needs considerable skill and knowledge. Is that available?”
“On this legislation, he helped to put forcefully the views of the Committee to the Assembly, the Minister and the Department of Justice, and I compliment him on his work. It has been very positive.”
The complete record
Every one of 739 lines we hold for Alban Maginness, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 15.
“I do not intend to rehearse what the Minister and others have said. I will keep my comments as brief as possible. <BR /> <BR />The SDLP supports the Bill. Although it has gone through with accelerated passage, the Assembly and the Committee for Social Development have had the opportunity to scrutinise the Bill and, indeed, to scrutinise the Minister on this important issue. As mentioned by the Minister during the Second Stage debate, increasing life expectancy should be celebrated — we all celebrate that, collectively and personally — although it brings with it its own issues and challenges, including the issue of pensions. Therefore, the issue of pensions is becoming more and more important for more and more people.”
“I wish the junior Minister well in her new role, and I look forward to working with her. I wish the First Minister well in his retirement. <BR /> <BR />There is a purported commitment to an anti-poverty strategy by the Office of the First and deputy First Minister. Given the fact that they have handed welfare back to Westminster and the prospect of the introduction by the British Government directly here of a benefits freeze and an individual benefits cap of about £20,000, does that not sit uneasily with any purported anti-poverty strategy?”
“I will, indeed. Not surprisingly, delays in funding affect community groups' ability to attract and, more importantly, retain valuable members of staff.”
“In many instances, they had to avoid debtors and suffer the inordinate pressure of being chased for money, all due to a delay in processing the fund payments. It is important to note that this is often due to delayed payments from the previous funding round, not even the latest one. This type of funding delay actually perpetuates further inability to receive funding for many community groups. Thousands of pounds are still owed by the Department to many groups, preventing further applications. Again, I say that this is intolerable. The Department holds the purse strings and therefore the lifeline of community groups across the North. It is for this reason that it must be more efficient. <BR /> <BR />Delays affect cash flow, effective administration, claimants, the income that is generated and morale.”
“<BR /> <BR />The lack of communication around this and other issues between the Department for Employment and Learning, the European Union, the Social Security Agency, and jobs and benefits offices' staff has no doubt been detrimental to this innovative and much-need project. <BR /> <BR />There can be no doubt that the Department for Employment and Learning's staff are under immense pressure at the level of applications to the fund. It means that the administrative burden is very heavy. However, we must not forget the pressure that is placed on local community groups by funding delays. This year, many groups were forced to place staff on notice — and that really is intolerable — in an attempt to juggle various pots of money.”
“It is a great project for an area with pronounced problems, such as the north-west. It has a great partnership approach. However, the process has not been without its issues. Those administering Kickstart to Work have complained about the changing goalposts at the Department for Employment and Learning. The project is still awaiting clarification on new processes by the Department. What is proving particularly difficult is having Jobseeker's Allowance (JSA) claimants released to participate in the scheme. The question is clear: why would anyone agree to a back-to-work scheme if it affects their benefits detrimentally? It is a fundamental question.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is important to say that despite the negative feedback that we all hear about ESF application processes, truly wonderful things are being achieved at grass-roots level thanks to the fund. Those achievements are often underappreciated, occurring as they do amongst those who find themselves furthest away from formal education and indeed the job market. I cannot mention all the groups that are achieving great things thanks to the fund, but one good example is, in fact, in the north-west. <BR /> <BR />Derry City and Strabane District Council recently commenced an ESF-funded Kickstart to Work project that addresses barriers to education and training; work experience and employment initiatives; and post-employment support for 350 enrollees — quite a substantial number.”
“I rise on behalf of the SDLP to speak on the motion. I am filling in for Mr Pat Ramsey, who, regrettably, cannot attend the debate. They are big shoes to fill, but I will attempt to do that, nonetheless. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this important debate on the European social fund. It is clear that there are many pressing issues with the fund and, more precisely, the application process. Community groups have found great difficulty in navigating the process. They have relayed to us that it is an unnecessarily arduous and lengthy application process. I am sure that many of us in our constituency offices are familiar with spending time trying to assist very frustrated community groups to get their projects off the ground.”
“I thank the Minister for her very detailed announcement to the Assembly. It is very important that we take note of what you said, particularly that making arts and culture available to everyone should not be interpreted as a path to diluting the arts. Arts and culture matter to people. In implementing a strategy of this sort, how will the Minister ensure that all sectors of the arts receive a fair and balanced distribution of funding? It is a matter of great concern to some that elements of the arts are favoured over others.”
“In a sense, it does not really help the construction industry because it is for the purchase and recycling of homes presently built, rather than new builds.”
“I thank the Minister for her exhaustive, perhaps even exhausting statement, this morning. In relation to the allocation of £63·4 million to DSD for the Co-ownership Housing Association, is she convinced that there is the capacity to dispose of that funding in co-ownership housing, given that we have only four months, effectively, until the end of the financial year?”
“I wait with interest and some curiosity to see who will make the decision and to what Department the Bill will fall.”
“<BR /> <BR />At any rate, the implementation of the Bill and the reduction of metal crime will be greatly assisted by the joint efforts of the DOJ, DOE, PSNI and all related agencies working together after the completion of the Bill. I support the principle of the Bill, but I have to indicate that my party and I have reservations as to how it should be implemented. I wait for the authorities in the House to decide on the allocation of the Bill. I am not sure who will make the decision. I understood that it would be the Business Committee. I have asked members of the Business Committee, but they seem to say, "Well, it's not really our responsibility. It it is a matter for the Executive to make a decision in relation to who deals with the Bill".”
“Both sides have, indeed, compelling arguments, but I am of the opinion that, as the central purpose and principle of the Bill, as I stated earlier, is tackling metal theft crime, the implication of the legislation in dealing with that would naturally make it a Department of Justice issue. Further to that, I note that the legislation, in the form of the Scrap Metal Dealers Act 2013, in England was prepared by the Home Office and passed at Westminster, whereas, in Scotland, the Scottish Justice Directorate dealt with the legislation, not the equivalent Department of the Environment. Therefore, I argue that a precedent has been set by other legislatures, and the Northern Ireland Department of Justice — the body with the greatest equivalence to the Westminster and Scottish sponsoring Departments — is best placed to prepare the Bill.”
“Metal theft, upsetting or damaging as it is, does not really fall under this, as it is a crime of material. I suspect that, if the Bill falls into the DOE remit, the Department will need a serious investment of funds from the Executive in order to gain competency in criminal action and the tracking of financial mismanagement. That would provide an extra burden on the Department in dealing with something that is a non-environmental issue. It would be easier to leave the issue under Justice, which, through the PSNI and other relevant agencies, has the skills and knowledge required.”
“<BR /> <BR />There is an issue, however, that has been raised by two Members, and that is that there is a departmental conflict over the Bill. The central issue of the Bill appears to be whose legislative remit it actually falls under — the Department of the Environment or the Department of Justice. Mr Beggs, as I understand it, believes that the Department of the Environment should be responsible for implementing the Bill, as scrap dealers are regulated under waste legislation; however, the DOE believes that the primary purpose of the Bill is the prevention of non-environmental crime and that it is not for the Department to deal with directly. I believe that the current waste framework directive intention is to protect the environment and the population's health in relation to the environment.”
“The PSNI report 'Metal Theft in Northern Ireland: Quarterly Update to 31st March 2013' recorded that nearly 300 crimes of burglary, robbery and theft were related to metal. In 2015, an update on metal theft in Northern Ireland revealed that, this year, we have had 552 burglaries, robberies and offences relating to metal. Copper remains the most common metal, followed by lead. While the theft figures are still a cause for concern, they are something that we must deal with at source. In Mr Beggs's consultation, 75% of respondents believed that the current legislation was not adequate in detecting the trade in stolen metal. Another 75% believed that the voluntary code of guidance was not sufficient in dealing with metal theft, while 85% agreed that legislation was indeed necessary to combat the problem.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Bill seeks to provide new provisions for the further regulation of scrap dealers in Northern Ireland and to directly tackle the stealing and sale of metal. We must all support that. The Bill also aims to reduce the effect of thefts on victims and to protect resources overall. The Bill seeks to licence scrap metal businesses and regulate aspects of the sale and purchase of the metal. <BR /> <BR />There is a public concern and interest in more robust regulation in this area. My party has been clear that we are concerned about the rise in the theft of metal for sale. We believe that it is essential that organised criminal organisations no longer profit from these acts.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Bill's origins arise from the significant levels of theft of lead and copper in Belfast, the greater Belfast area and Northern Ireland in general. Metal is sometimes stolen as manhole covers and, at other times, from electricity substations and is then sold on by organised criminal gangs to scrap metal dealers. All those crimes have an immediate consequence for the public whether it is disruption to a service or the public cost of replacing the material. The illegal trade and sale of metal remains a lucrative business, and it is crucial that Northern Ireland has robust regulations that are able to tackle those crimes through targeting and through the regulation of scrap metal dealers.”
“We are dealing with the general principles of the Bill today, and my party and I support its general principles. The principal objective of the Bill is to combat the trade of illegally obtained metal in Northern Ireland, particularly high-value metal such as copper and aluminium. The Bill seeks to do that by licensing the carrying on of scrap metal dealing businesses and certain aspects of the sale and purchase of metal in Northern Ireland. It is clear that there has been significant cost and disruption to private individuals, churches, schools and public and private bodies as a result of stolen metal. At present, there is no legislative requirement for those dealing in scrap metal to provide an audit trail and reduce the ease with which stolen property is traded.”
“I thank the Minister for her interesting answer. When the work done by Dr Scott comes into being, will the Minister go out to further consultation, or what process will she follow on foot of the report?”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. I fully support the reform programme that he has quite properly directed, but the report is also a serious disappointment to me, because it is damning, as the Chair rightly said. I am sure that the Minister will agree. Central to that is the failure of industrial relations in the prison. Does the Minister agree that the central issue of industrial relations in the prison is affecting all aspects of the reform programme? When will the industrial relations issue be settled?”
“I thank the Minister for his detailed answers. Clearly, everyone, including local residents and business folk, is supportive of him trying to get investment into the area, but the problem is this: as far as the businesspeople are concerned, the plan as it exists does not attract investment into the area. In fact, they believe that it is doing the opposite and is deterring investment. There must therefore be a speedy outcome to all of this so that there can be a clear idea of what will happen in the area in the near future.”
“Despite Mr Allister's negative approach to the HIU, will the Minister reassure the House that it is a valuable and necessary part of the Stormont House Agreement in addressing the past and giving some clear answers to the relatives of those who were slain during the Troubles?”
“Yes, in circumstances where the recommendation is rejected, the complainant can go to the County Court in order to have it determine what payment can, in fact, be made and effectively imposed upon the person or body complained about, but that is an entirely different situation. I just wanted to clarify that point, because I think it is important that the legal and factual situation be properly expressed in the House so that people outside are properly informed of the situation.”
“It has been suggested that this is, effectively, a compensatory payment that the ombudsman is imposing on the public body or individual complained about. That is an incorrect interpretation of the previous legislation and what is proposed in this Bill; he is making a recommendation. The whole approach of the ombudsman is to try to reach a settlement, and contained within that settlement is a recommendation. The person or body complained about does not have to accept the recommendation, although it has to be said that, in many instances, it is accepted. However, it is not, in fact, a compensatory payment: that should be made clear. That view has been expressed to the Ad Hoc Committee and to the House, and I think it is incorrect.”
“The Member makes a very good point. It may well be that the House prefers the new arrangement, or what is posited as the new arrangement, in terms of the ombudsman having that discretion. <BR /> <BR />I raise these points because I think that, where stakeholders go to the extent of giving evidence to a Committee — the Ad Hoc Committee in this instance — and make representations to individual Committee members and individual political parties in the House, we should at least ventilate those issues so that they are not forgotten about when we consider aspects of this Bill or, indeed, any other legislation. <BR /> <BR />I will just conclude by speaking about clause 11(b) on an investigation by the ombudsman, which states:”
“What I do raise is the issue of whether the House should consider allowing the current situation to remain — an automatic right to legal representation in certain circumstances — as opposed to a discretion on the part of the ombudsman. I raise the issue because I think that the House should think carefully about this and reflect on it, and it may be that, at Further Consideration Stage, the matter could be re-examined by way of further amendment. Technically, it may prove difficult when considering whether or not that is possible. Nonetheless, the House should be sensitive to the matter and give it special consideration. There is a sense that, if there is not automatic legal representation, then the person or body being investigated would be at a disadvantage.”
“The BMA raised that matter. It said that the opportunity currently exists in article 12 of the Commissioner for Complaints (Northern Ireland) Order 1996 for the body complained against to request a formal hearing and be legally represented. The BMA said that, under the Bill, that provision will be removed but that there is a right to legal representation at the ombudsman's discretion. That is correct: if this clause is accepted, there is now a discretion, in certain circumstances, for the ombudsman to permit legal representation. <BR /> <BR />I am not saying definitively at this point that I disagree with the removal of the automatic right of representation and that the discretion is wrong.”
“I am grateful to Mr Nesbitt for his contribution. It is important to reassure the public generally and legal practitioners. Effectively, there is a firewall for the legal advice that the ombudsman receives, which does not permit such legal advice or information to go further than his office. It is important to remember that. <BR /> <BR />Another issue relates to clause 30(7)(b) and legal representation. That clause gives the NIPSO discretion to determine whether a person can be legally or otherwise represented. Subsection (7) states:”
“It also concerned the Law Society and others involved in the legal profession, but I think that the House can be assured that, in fact, legal professional privilege is protected, and the Bill continues with that protection.”
“<BR /> <BR />I wanted to raise that because I know that it was a matter that concerned a number of people, not just the BMA but the Bar Council.”
“The legal advice is, however, not shared with the complainant, or with any other person, and is held in confidence by the ombudsman and his staff. <BR /> <BR />I would certainly be very concerned if, in fact, that threatened legal privilege, as it is important that we preserve legal privilege. However, given the legal advice that the Ad Hoc Committee received on this matter, and considering what the ombudsman has said about this aspect of the Bill — that is, clause 32(1) and (2) — I am reassured that legal professional privilege is not threatened in a real sense by clause 32. Those who have, properly, raised criticisms about clause 32 should themselves be reassured that it does not stray into that area and that legal privilege is safeguarded in these circumstances.”
“I wish to refer to clauses 30 and 32. Clause 32(1) and (2) deals with legal privilege. Some issues were raised in relation to legal privilege, and it is worth addressing them. It has been suggested, in particular by the BMA, that those provisions would introduce a new power for the NIPSO to override legal professional privilege. In fact and, indeed, in law, that is not correct because the ombudsman's current powers in relation to investigations conducted as the Assembly Ombudsman under the Ombudsman (Northern Ireland) Order 1996 permit the ombudsman access to legal advice held by Northern Ireland Civil Service Departments and their statutory agencies. His practice has been to request access to legal advice infrequently and only where it is relevant to an investigation.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I think that this is an important point not just politically but constitutionally: if the Assembly is given the power to appoint and provide for, in payment to and the terms and conditions of, the NIPSO, that power should not be restricted by the Department of Finance and Personnel through funding. It is very important that the office of the ombudsman is seen to be and is, in fact, independent and properly resourced, and no constraints should be placed on it by the political office of the Department of Health and Social Services. The point that I am making to Lord Morrow is, I think, a very important and crucial part of the Assembly's considerations. Any safeguards that the Member has talked about must be foolproof and guarantee that independence, not just to the NIPSO but to the Assembly itself.”
“I congratulate the Minister, of course, on his good work arising out of the recent legislation in this matter, and I look forward to the full and faithful implementation of the charter. I think that it will be of benefit to everyone, but, naturally, to those who have been the victims of criminal activity.”
“That, I believe, is another important step forward. On quite a number of occasions, people have told me of their feelings of discomfort and, sometimes, intimidation, on finding themselves almost cheek by jowl with defendants in court premises. Hopefully, this will ease that situation, and there will, at least in new court premises, be a complete avoidance of that unnecessary and discomforting contact between the victim and those who are charged with injuring them in some way. <BR /> <BR />Those are just three examples; I am not going to go on. I welcome this. Those are practical examples of the benefits of this charter, and I congratulate the Committee on its good work.”
“and the processes associated with that. <BR /> <BR />Paragraph 79 and standard 2.2 of the victim charter provide for the review of a decision not to prosecute and for information to be received about this. This is an important right for a victim; that, in certain circumstances, there can be a review of a decision by the Public Prosecution Service not to prosecute. <BR /> <BR />Further, article 19 establishes the right to avoidance of contact between the victim and the offender. Article 19(1) provides for:”
“One further point is on rights in the event of a decision not to prosecute. Article 11(1) provides:”
“I did not expect any special treatment as a public representative, but if that represented the way in which ordinary people were treated by the police and the prosecution service, I think it is quite right to say that victims were let down by the public services.”
“It relates to information about the police investigation, decisions to prosecute, time and place of trial and the nature of charges. <BR /> <BR />The experience of individual victims in the past was that they did not know that a person was prosecuted, convicted or acquitted. That may surprise people in the House, but my personal experience in 2001 when my office was bombed and there could have been very serious injury to three people who were in it at the time, was that, although I knew that a police investigation had taken place and I somehow found out that maybe somebody had been charged, it was not until some weeks after a person had been convicted that I was told that. Indeed, I had to call on the police to give me further information on it.”
“The victim of crime was mentioned in passing, but it was really the defendant and the prosecution, as such, who were the two central characters in the trial situation. Now, victims, quite properly, are recognised universally. <BR /> <BR />I also mention that this arises not just out of the considerations of the Justice Committee but from the European directive. Those who campaign now on Europe should remember that it has brought many positive things into our political life, and this is just one of them. <BR /> <BR />The point I make is that victims are now quite properly recognised in law as having certain rights. If I could just point out that, in relation to this particular statutory rule, the right of victims to receive information about their case is very important.”
“I lend my support and that of my party to this statutory rule. I also pay tribute to the Justice Committee for its work in bringing this about. It was part of the report of the Committee into the victims of crime. It was certainly a central aspect of that report. I think that it is right and proper to pay tribute to the former Chairperson of the Justice Committee, Mr Givan — the Deputy Chair has already paid tribute to him — in championing this approach by the Justice Committee. I think it is right and proper that we note that. <BR /> <BR />When I was a junior counsel at the Bar dealing with criminal matters, victims played no part in the considerations of the court. They were simply like part of the furniture. That, sadly, was my experience.”
“I thank the Minister for her previous answer. Belfast Central Library is the jewel in the crown as far as libraries are concerned here in Northern Ireland. I support the Minister in her business case and the progress that has been made. Given the fact that the business case is now almost complete, when does she estimate that this project can get off the ground and when will we see completion?”
“I am grateful to the Minister for giving way. <BR /> <BR />The Minister touches on a very important point about legacy inquests and other investigations into the deaths of people during the Troubles, and that is the level of disclosure made available by state agencies; for example, the Ministry of Defence and the PSNI. Is the Minister aware of the necessity for the state to cooperate fully and to give full disclosure so that those inquests can be effectively and properly investigated, resulting in, at the end of the day, a verdict or a conclusion that is satisfactory to the bereaved families?”
“Unfortunately, the resources are simply not there. <BR /> <BR />I will conclude on the following point. This is a timely debate, and I thank Mr Lynch for bringing the motion to the House. It has a wider political dimension, which is reflected in the talks that are ongoing today, and have been for some weeks, on the Stormont House Agreement. It involves us collectively putting our minds together to address the very difficult issues from the past that affect us in the present. Unless we deal with them now, they will haunt us forever.”
“Mr Lunn raises an interesting point. I was unaware that he had specifically declined the appointment. My understanding was that he would become president in November of this year. That date may well not be met. I hope that it will be met, because the Lord Chief Justice has expressed his concerns publicly on the matter and he would be ably suited to dealing with the situation that has arisen over many years. <BR /> <BR />The legacy inquests that we have talked about arise from the decisions of the European Court in dealing with article 2 compliance. That is an important issue for all of us. Apart from that, we have the whole system of inquests. We perhaps overly concentrate on legacy inquests, but there is a whole system of inquests in Northern Ireland that needs proper addressing by the coronial service.”
“That is a lot of work that needs to be addressed by the Coroners Service. It therefore requires the necessary resources — the necessary personnel — to deal with that work. I know that the Minister does not directly appoint coroners — it is up to the Northern Ireland Judicial Appointments Commission (NIJAC) to do that — but I would be interested to hear from the Minister about early appointments and how those appointments will address the backlog that everybody is concerned about.”
“I am told that, according to the latest assessment, there are 53 legacy inquests outstanding.”
“Of course, in relation to the latter point, the Lord Chief Justice will soon assume the position of president of the Coroners' Court. The Lord Chief Justice, in the exercise of his office as president, will be able to allocate more complex legacy cases to a judge coroner at a higher judicial tier. That will include High Court judges, who could examine some of the outstanding legacy inquests that are still on the books.”