Emma Sheerin
Mid Ulster · Sinn Féin · Northern Ireland
“Given what we have seen unfold across the North in recent weeks, it is important that we acknowledge that they are people with particular vulnerabilities who are particularly sensitive and, with that in mind, consider our language.”
“No, I will not give way. You have rambled on for long enough in this place. <BR /> <BR />When it comes to the early clauses of the Bill, I, like others, put on the record our appreciation of the work of Geraldine Hanna and our support for the intent of Part 1 of the Bill, which puts the role that she has been carrying out impeccably thus…”
“I thank the Minister for clarifying that immigration is an excepted matter, which means that it is the responsibility of the British Government and nothing to do with the House.”
“On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Members will be aware that the DUP and some of its lackeys in the UUP cynically used petitions of concern, two weeks ago, to block rights for children.”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak at the Second Stage of the Victims and Witnesses of Crime Bill. I am proud to be from a party that consistently supports the best available human rights advice on all matters.”
“For many years, Donaldson used his position of power to abuse and to escape justice. He presented himself as a role model. We now know that that was bogus and that his public persona was a deception.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,123 lines we hold for Emma Sheerin, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 23.
“In our engagements with the Department, we were told that the PSNI is the data owner and that it is for the PSNI to determine whether there is a policing need to continue to retain a person's material, which, again, reflects our earlier conversations about the PSNI requiring that data for future investigations. We have serious concerns that that misses the point. The PSNI does not own the data. Biometric data is highly personal, and it belongs to the individual in question. That right must be protected. <BR /> <BR />We agree with the Department that the biometrics commissioner should be the ultimate authority in deciding the outcome of an appeal and that that should be out of the hands of the PSNI. We argue that it should not be via a complaints mechanism, as the Minister proposed, but via a direct case-handling function.”
“Where an individual is unhappy with its decision, they have the right to appeal it and can ask the PSNI to reconsider their request. That appeal would be carried out by a more senior PSNI officer. We have concerns that that looks like the PSNI marking its own homework, so to speak. Law enforcement agencies would want to hold on to that data for as long as possible, but it is up to us as legislators to ensure that safeguards are in place to protect individuals' rights. <BR /> <BR />I thank the Minister's team for being so open to conversations with us when we sought clarity on those proposals.”
“At Second Stage, Members raised the point in the Chamber that they were greatly concerned about the volume of proposed amendments that related to provisions that were not in the Bill from the beginning. We require clarity on exactly how the new proposals for a biometrics commissioner will work. You will understand my concern that the Bill sets out a skeleton framework for appeals and oversight mechanisms, with the Department stating that the regulations on the review, including the statutory review dates, will be subject to public consultation and then considered by the Assembly. <BR /> <BR />Under the framework in the Bill, an individual has the right to ask the PSNI to conduct a review, which would then be conducted by a designated PSNI review team.”
“Our proposals better reflect the provisions contained in the Justice Act 2002 that mean that the best interests of children must be the primary consideration for all public bodies, and I hope to see support for them across the House. Those specific proposals are reflected in our amendments, and I ask people to support amendment Nos 11, 12, 13, 23 and 24. <BR /> <BR />I turn to the independence of the biometrics commissioner, which we touched on earlier. A focus of the Marper judgement was the absence of a robust process to review the need to continue to retain DNA and fingerprints. I do not think that the concerns that were outlined in that judgement have been addressed yet.”
“Again, that goes to the heart of what we are trying to do here, which is to prioritise human rights, particularly the human rights of children. The Bill as drafted includes shorter retention periods for under-18s than for adults, and we welcome that to some extent, but we support the Scottish approach whereby a child's data can be retained for only three years unless the police apply for and are granted an extension of two years by the court. In answer to Mr Frew's request for clarification, there is no limit on the number of applications for extension that can be granted, so the retention period is not capped at seven years. <BR /> <BR />I know that, in introducing the Bill, the Minister has a commitment to strengthening legislative provisions for children.”
“We do not want to criminalise our young people and entrench them into that justice system that then, as the evidence tells us, leads to higher likelihood of reoffending. <BR /> <BR />I refer briefly to our neighbours in Scotland, who have considered the issue and adopted a different model from the one that we are on the path to adopting here in the North, as set out in the code of practice for the Scottish Biometrics Commissioner. In Scotland, biometric data for under-18s is only captured and retained for those arrested for violent or sexual offences, or otherwise by exception. Since that model was adopted in 2024, there has been a significant decrease in the number of children who have had their biometric data retained. The Scottish Biometrics Commissioner has stated that the outcome of that policy change:”
“That goes to the heart of what our amendments to the Bill try to do. We want to have a compassionate approach, particularly to children and young people. In other parts of the Bill and in a number of proposed amendments, children and young people are treated differently to adults. Our youth justice system should be based on principles of rehabilitation rather than punitive punishment. That is what our amendments seek to do. The threshold for retaining a child's biometric data should be markedly higher than that applied to adults and that the Assembly should be cautious about creating a system in which children who have committed minor offences, or who have not been convicted at all, can have biometric data retained by the state.”
“I am here to eat my words after being over-ambitious about being finished before lunchtime, having preached to Paul all week about the length of time that we take to speak. That is a bit of a lesson for me. I will return to what we were talking about prior to Question Time and the break for lunch: the Minister's response on the retention of biometric data for under-18s. <BR /> <BR />I refer to what we heard in the wake of the Marper judgement from the Human Rights Commission, which stated clearly:”
“My colleague Ciara Ferguson will touch more heavily on the retention framework for under-18s, but we are seriously concerned that the Bill goes beyond what is necessary. We know and the evidence tells us that, when young people and children are systemised, they are more likely to remain in the system. We know about the problems that we have, and we know about the societal influences that lead to crime and the problems we have in the North.”
“We require, in human rights law, more than a speculative possibility that retained data might one day prove useful. Interferences with privacy must be necessary and proportionate, and the state must provide a compelling justification for retaining information about people who, in the eyes of the law, are innocent. <BR /> <BR />The European Court of Human Rights has repeatedly emphasised that principle, including in the Marper judgement, which the Bill seeks to remedy. In that case, the Court was particularly concerned about the retention of biometric material belonging to people who had not been convicted of any offence. Amendment No 5, therefore, would remedy that by restricting the right to retain an individual's data when someone is arrested or charged with a qualifying offence but has been acquitted or has not been prosecuted.”
“It was of concern to us when, during the Committee's scrutiny, issues were raised by the Law Society, the Human Rights Commission and the Policing Board's human rights adviser about the proportionality of some elements of the Bill and when they questioned whether some of those elements were compatible with article 8 of the ECHR. <BR /> <BR />We identified issues around retention periods for individuals who had been acquitted or where an allegation is not prosecuted, as well as proportionality issues regarding the proposed frameworks for under-18s. I can accept that there are cases where an individual has been assessed as posing a threat or further risk of reoffending, but that is a hypothetical position: the starting point must be the presumption of innocence.”
“I welcome the proposals for a new biometrics commissioner, but I question, as we have done throughout the Committee Stage, whether that commissioner has the necessary independence and powers to adjudicate on disputes about police decisions to retain data. We also carefully examined how biometric retention frameworks were developed and rolled out in other jurisdictions, and we learned some valuable lessons from that. <BR /> <BR />When it comes to people who have been arrested or charged but not convicted, a defendant's human rights have to be balanced with society's right to be safe and free from crime. That is a complicated but important task.”
“I thank our comrades in the policy team and those in the human rights fraternity who gave us assistance in identifying gaps and ways that we could improve things. <BR /> <BR />We need to strike the correct balance. On one hand, we want to ensure that our criminal justice system has access to modern tools that can help to keep people safe and bring offenders to justice, but we also must recognise that biometric data is highly personal. It belongs to people, not the state. Its collection, use and retention must be subject to appropriate safeguards. We need to have trust from the public in a biometric framework that not only works but has proper checks and balances to prevent overreach.”
“Sinn Féin has tabled a number of amendments — amendment Nos 5, 11, 12, 13, 23, 24, 28, 29, 32, 34 and 35 — which I will speak to in the first instance. It is important to set out the context of those amendments. <BR /> <BR />A new legislative framework to handle biometric data retention is necessary because of two legal challenges that resulted in judgements by the European Court of Human Rights. The court found that our existing data retention framework infringed on people's rights. The indefinite retention periods and the absence of a meaningful review process were identified as key problems, and that is what has led to it. I welcome the fact that the Minister has sought to remedy those human rights infringements under the new framework. Human rights were at the forefront of our minds as we sought to amend the Bill.”
“I thank everybody who has contributed to the debate. I welcome the Consideration Stage of the Justice Bill. I commend the work of the Minister, the Department and the Committee, including my party colleagues who were on the Committee before me. I thank Deirdre Hargey, who was in the Chamber earlier. She served as the Deputy Chair before me and did a brilliant job. She has been a great support to me since I came to the Committee in explaining the context of a lot of the issues. I also thank the Bill Office and everybody there: they have been helpful with getting our amendments before the House. <BR /> <BR />We are discussing the group 1 amendments, which relate to biometric data retention and police photographs.”
“Hopefully, I will be finished. Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-Leas-Cheann Comhairle.”
“On the first instance, the Member can invoke his right as someone born on the island of Ireland to have an Irish passport and therefore not have to go through that process. <BR /> <BR />Secondly, the Minister referred to the application to the biometrics commissioner, and I will talk in more detail about our concerns on that. There are worries about the independence of that person, who will, ultimately, still be answerable to the PSNI. The concern is that there is a presumption that someone who has been arrested is more likely to commit another crime. We are worried about the proportionality element.”
“I appreciate the Member giving way. Your earlier comments go to the heart of the matter. We have to balance human rights compliance with the ability of the judiciary and the Police Service to carry out their functions. We also have to remember that the assumption of innocence is paramount. The Member for West Belfast referred to somebody being charged with a very minor crime as a result of their being at a protest, for example. Someone in that situation could then be presumed to be capable of further crime, even though that person would not ordinarily be involved in crime. Are we setting a dangerous precedent, or putting a theory in the mind of the police, that that is the first cohort that they go to as being likely to be involved in crime when, in fact, those people are not so at all?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. On the point that you have just made, do you have concerns relating to the fact that the Law Society and other human rights advisers have told us very clearly that the ability to retain someone's data after they have been acquitted is potentially in breach of article 8 of the human rights convention?”
“Minister, I thank you for the work that you have done on what is highly important legislation. What engagement have you had with campaigners to date? You have said that you want things to be done properly.”
“Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht a fhreagra.”
“Tourettes Action produced an amazing video to raise awareness of the condition that was not mainstreamed by the Education Authority, despite promises that it would be, and the Department of Health does not hold data on the number of people across the North with the condition. <BR /> <BR />All that leads to misinformation and people fighting for years to get a diagnosis, and then they cannot access the support that they need because of the lack of awareness and understanding of Tourette's. Therefore, during Tourette's Awareness Month, I ask you all to be kind and remember that people with Tourette's cannot control it.”
“<BR /> <BR />What is more frustrating than all that is the fact that our statutory services, which should be offering support to our children and young people in particular with Tourette's, end up making life worse for them. The Department of Health and the Department of Education are ill equipped to deal with the condition. There is no specific training service for educational psychologists in the Education Authority regarding Tourette's. In a response to a recent Assembly question, I was told that there is no specific treatment path in the Department of Health for people with the condition.”
“We see it represented in the media, films and TV shows as something that is humorous and can be mocked, as demonstrated recently in the news story around the awards show in the wake of the amazing film, 'I Swear', which I encourage people to watch, tough as it is to get through. I have been told by people who have Tourette's that their tics, which they cannot control and which are often debilitating, are made worse by the fact that the general public and people who really should know better end up making their condition worse and making life tougher for them. I have heard of young people being admonished in the cinema, in church and in queues in shopping centres for something that they cannot control, which worsens the anxiety that they suffer as a result of their condition.”
“Tourette's Awareness Month takes place from 15 May to 15 June. Tourette's is a condition that suffers a lot of bad press, mainly down to the fact that it is widely misunderstood. People who live with the condition of Tourette's are often the butt of the joke. They suffer misinformation and are mimicked and mocked at every turn. I am proud and privileged to know personally a number of people in my constituency and across the North who have the condition of Tourette's and are involved in the Tourette's support group. They do amazing work for families, particularly young people and children who suffer with Tourette's. Their stories are heartbreaking. The testimony that I have listened to would bring tears to a stone. <BR /> <BR />People often make fun of the condition.”
“Does the Member agree with me that one such family is the family of Sean Brown, who was murdered in our constituency almost 30 years ago? That family has had to fight for justice ever since.”
“Minister, I know how much work you have put into the Bill. I know that it is very close to your heart and is legislation that will improve the lot of workers across the North. I am sure that you will agree with me that it is important that the Bill does not face further delay at the Executive and is brought to the Assembly as soon as possible so that the Economy Committee can carry out its important scrutiny.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. What she said at the beginning of her contribution goes to the heart of one of the frustrations that I, as somebody who believes in a united Ireland and wants to see it delivered, have. We do not want just to rub away the border and stick the two states together. As a Sinn Féin representative, I know how hard our Ministers in particular work. They are, however, working within an arrangement that stymies growth and delivery. We have to rely on a Westminster Government to provide us with the funds to deliver for people here, and we see how chaotic an arrangement that is.”
“We are trying our best to work within that prism. That is the challenge that we have. This place allows us to make incremental gains, but that is all that they are. You know that as well as I do. You referred to the farming families that you want to support. You only want to support some of them. You do not care about hill farmers. You voted against Declan McAleer's areas with natural constraints Bill, which would deliver support to real people.”
“The Member knows rightly what I meant. Your party has Ministers in Government, and you know how difficult it is to deliver in this place. I say that as somebody whose party's Ministers are trying to deliver but cannot because your party's Ministers are blocking them. The nationalist people come to us, continuously, with complaints about a lack of delivery here, because we see the worst impact of a right-wing regressive DUP policy that is anti-Irish, anti-rights, anti-bill of rights and anti-delivery of anything progressive. "No, no, no. Never, never, never": that is all we ever hear. That is the tip of the iceberg with regard to the British establishment with which we are trying to work. <BR /> <BR />We know that this constitutional arrangement cannot go on forever, and we know that it does not work for the people whom we represent.”
“It is our responsibility to have that conversation and to stand up for those people and show them what a new Ireland could look like. That is what the motion should be about, and it is the focus that we should have. Rather than allowing ourselves to be swept away by the hatred of Nigel Farage and his cohort, we should be talking about hope — hope for the future and hope for a better way. <BR /> <BR />This state has not delivered for any of the people whom we represent. We know that it is not going to work long term; there is no length in it. It is —.”
“Week after week, politicians come to the Chamber and bemoan the lack of delivery from this place and the problems that we face across our health service, education sector, road network and infrastructure, all of which, we know, are a result of a lack of funding over decades, and a system in which we cannot succeed long term. This island is too small to support two of everything. There is duplication of service everywhere. It does not make sense. From a basic economic perspective, there is no rationale to support it. It is the status quo for us to say, "People have the right to want a united Ireland, and they have the right to remain within the United Kingdom, but, for now, let's just stop talking about it" and then continue within our current arrangement. People are voting against the status quo.”
“<BR /> <BR />We have had references to the fact that Sinn Féin is the biggest party in Ireland and, obviously, the Six Counties. We are so because people want to reject the status quo. The motion alludes to the fact that we have to plot our way to a new Ireland. We have to bear in mind that that debate, without the calling of a referendum, has not yet started in earnest. The people are ahead of us. We are here as representatives of the people, and people are already talking about Irish unity and what it will look like. We all have to be engaged in that conversation. It is for us to have that debate and to see that change formulate. For us to say, "Oh no, we just have to remain tethered to Britain" does a great disservice to all those whom we represent.”
“We should engage in a conversation about the fact that the SNP has won its fifth election in a row and Plaid Cymru has become the biggest party in Wales. That is people voting for change. It is people exhibiting bravery; it is people voting for a different way of life; and it is people rejecting the chaos of Westminster. How much more explicit could that be than it has been in the past week? The current Labour Government cannot even deliver for themselves. They are so distracted that the thought of delivering for the English people, let alone for people in towns and cities across this place that they could not point to on a map, is ridiculous. There has been a lot of sticking your head in the sand and not wanting to engage. That is not helpful for any of the people whom we represent.”
“I welcome today's debate. Unlike some others, I think that it is appropriate that we, as political activists in the North of Ireland, have conversations about elections that will ultimately affect us, and that is a sensible and rational thing for us to do. Whilst the debate thus far has been interesting and, perhaps, entertaining at times, it has probably missed the point. It is very clear that political unionism is rattled in the wake of the election results just over a week ago, and that is understandable, given that the so-called Union is shaking at the seams, and we can see that reflected in the voting patterns across England, Scotland and Wales. <BR /> <BR />The big story in the headlines after the local elections was the success of pro-independence parties in Scotland and Wales, and the significance of that cannot be overstated.”
“Absolutely. One of that lady's sons has done an economic analysis of how much the trust pays to keep her in the care home, where she is unhappy. Her mental health and emotional well-being are taking a hammering because she does not want to be there; she wants to be at home. It does not make sense, but the carers, who want to be out with her and have a relationship with her, cannot afford to fulfil that call. <BR /> <BR />We have carers, family members, patients and our elderly population in distress. It is clear that there is agreement across the House that this is something that needs action urgently. I would like the Minister, as he has repeatedly told us he will, to deliver on that.”
“<BR /> <BR />On the other side of that are the carers, who, as multiple contributors to the debate mentioned, are paid minimum wage for a job that is emotionally, physically and mentally draining. Again, as we have seen over the years, that workforce is dominated by women. It is not a job; it is a vocation. When people were able to make a decent living from that job, some of them ended up staying in it for far longer than they perhaps would have liked.”
“<BR /> <BR />I am in contact with a family whose 81-year-old mother was admitted to hospital in October last year. At that point, she had a care package with three calls a day. She was ready for discharge before Christmas, but she ended up in a rehab bed. She stayed there longer than she needed to. She was fit for discharge at the beginning of the year, but she ended up reluctantly taking a contingency bed in a different nursing home facility. She has been there since the end of February because the care package that she needs in order to return home safely has not been made available. That family are at their wits' end. They are begging for the bare minimum: four calls a day.”
“<BR /> <BR />We find that families are asked to fill in a carer's assessment and estimate how many hours of care they can cover themselves. They stop being a loved one — a relative, a wife, a daughter, a sister or a niece — and become an unpaid carer. They have to be there at 7.00 pm on a Tuesday evening and stay until 7.00 am the following morning. That means that their daughter, their son or their neighbour to whom they committed to give a lift is left in the lurch because they are no longer available. We see families who are at one another's throats and have to deal with all the tensions that arise because they are no longer just families who see each other socially when they want but managers of direct payment contracts and rotas. They have to deal with all those things that they should not have to deal with.”
“One of the most frustrating things that I find is that those people will make an argument to me to justify why they need that care. They tell me their story and about all the other pressures that are on them. They may be a wife or mother. They may work full-time hours or manage their own house. Often, it is a combination of all of those factors. They tell me that they are at their wits' end, and I say, "I know. I believe you. You do not have to justify yourself or explain your scenario or situation to me, because we all deserve healthcare that is free at the point of delivery". Our elderly population deserves a certain standard of care and dignity in their own home. They should not have to fight for it.”
“I turn to the asks in the motion. I have been raising the need for action on home care provision since I became an MLA, because it is one of the issues that are brought to me most frequently. We see it disproportionately in the rural constituency that I represent, Mid Ulster. I personally struggle with it, because it is one of the most heart-wrenching situations that you can deal with. I have spoken at length about it in the Chamber. <BR /> <BR />The majority of people who contact me about it are women. It is normally the daughters, daughters-in-law, sisters, nieces, neighbours or grandchildren of an elderly relative who ring me in distress, begging for a pitiful amount of care that would allow their loved one to remain safely at home.”
“However, one of the frustrating things about that is the fact that we see multiple instances of waste across the system, not least in capital projects. The pressures in our A&E departments and wards across hospitals in the North, which the Member for East Antrim mentioned, are part of the reason that so many of our healthcare staff in hospitals are under such severe pressure and, ultimately, end up on long-term sick leave. That requires their posts to be backfilled, meaning that we have an over-dependency on agency staff, which, again, is not cost-efficient.”
“<BR /> <BR />Apart from the fact that this is about bringing dignity to the people whom we represent, there is a very clear economic and financial argument that, if you are able to keep people safely at home for longer, you maintain their mental and emotional well-being if they are cared for at home, and they are less likely to have an accident that results in them having to attend hospital, which, ultimately, leads to fewer admissions to hospital. If people can be discharged safely in a timely manner, there are shorter hospital stays, and that reduces the pressure on our hospitals. <BR /> <BR />The Minister referred to the different pressures that he has to contend with in respect of the Health budget, and all Members across the House, particularly on these Benches, sympathise with him on that.”
“At the conclusion of the debate, it is fairly clear that there is consensus across the House. There were a number of recurring themes in Members' contributions here this afternoon. The Minister stated very clearly that he sees the need for action around home care and social care and the benefit that that can bring to us all because there really is no argument against the motion presented here today.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.”
“Like my constituency colleague, I am often lobbied by people who are experiencing delays with appeals and in their initial application for a firearm. In light of that, does the Minister agree that the proposed 153% increase in the fee for firearms licensing is extreme, given those pressures and the time that it takes to acquire a licence, and that farming and rural communities are already under significant pressure, particularly given the increase in the cost of fuel and fertiliser, and the other costs that they have to meet?”
“She talked about the reality of victims' experiences in courtrooms, when they cannot think clearly and have to face their perpetrators. That should give us all cause for concern. There is a lack of awareness of the systems that should be there to protect the victims, and we must ensure that everyone who has the right to access those systems — the barriers, the screens or the waiver on legal aid — can do so, and that is key. <BR /> <BR />In conclusion, I welcome the approach shown across the House today. I hope that we see action on this issue, so that no other victims turn into statistics.”
“<BR /> <BR />The testimony of the victims of abuse tells us that the court procedures, particularly their experiences in the family courts, are driving women away from reporting their abuse because, instead of the perpetrator being on trial, the victims are on trial and are being judged. All too often in this country and across the world, victims of sustained domestic abuse are judged for staying in relationships and bringing harm on themselves or for letting their children live in dangerous scenarios, when the reality is that when they try to leave the situation, they are also judged for putting themselves and/or their children at risk. <BR /> <BR />I will highlight the contribution from my colleagues to my left, particularly Aoife.”
“We know that most of victims of femicide — to whom we need to pay tribute far too frequently in this place — are killed at the hands of a man they know and oftentimes were in relationship with. <BR /> <BR />To deal with that, we must deal properly with the systems and forums that facilitate abuse and fail to protect the victims of abuse. I welcome the commitments given by the Minister, and the way in which she has received the motion. As outlined in our motion, we know that a lot of it has been legislated for already, but the research tells us that there are gaps. We want to see those gaps being addressed, and we all have to work collaboratively to achieve that.”
“I thank everyone who contributed to the debate, particularly my colleagues who spoke so movingly and who were working on the issue before I became a member of the Committee. <BR /> <BR />Coercive control is something that is pervasive throughout society, and we know that we need to see action on it. The unanimous support for the motion across the Chamber today is to be welcomed. We often talk in this place about how the North of Ireland is one of the most dangerous places in Europe to be a woman. We know that 30 women have been murdered in the North since 2020. We also know that the most dangerous time for a woman who is in danger is when she tries to leave an abusive relationship.”