Rachel Woods
North Down · Green Party · Northern Ireland
“We have to get it right, but we are not starting from scratch. We only have to look across the water or down the road to the public and private sectors that already offer that type of leave. <BR /> <BR />I now turn to the comments of other Members.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is time to end the coercive control that criminal gangs have over our communities. Victim and survivors' voices must be heard and reflected in our laws and policies. Minority groups should not be sidelined or silenced. We need to educate from a very young age.”
“There is no direct cost to employers from safe leave, and it is needed to deal with the issues related to abuse. We need to destigmatise abuse and tackle root causes, misogyny and toxic masculinity. <BR /> <BR />I agree with Mr Weir's comments. We should not need to have the protections in place.”
“I thank every Member who spoke during the debate for their comments and support for the Bill. I will address the Minister's comments first. I thank him for being here, and I am glad that he is feeling better. <BR /> <BR />The Assembly cares, and we need to work constructively together to help.”
“<BR /> <BR />As I said at Second Stage, period poverty must be viewed through the lens of children's rights and how the Bill meets our obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC).”
“<BR /> <BR />I take this opportunity at Final Stage to thank officials and members of the councils who took the time to discuss with me their policies, the background to them and how they are working in practice: thank you for everything that you are doing for your staff, and I hope that, should the Bill pass, your regional Parliaments an…”
The complete record
Every one of 1,434 lines we hold for Rachel Woods, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 18 of 29.
“That means that a victim of abuse can get protection against a perpetrator who is 18 years old but not one who is 17 years old or perhaps the protection that is available to them will be different. For future consideration, why should that be the case? Does that distinction exist in the case of, say, non-molestation orders or any other form of injunction that is available? If not, is there a particular reason why? <BR /> <BR />I reiterate that I fully understand the views of NICCY, and I agree that the criminal justice system should not be the first port of call for children and young people. I fully support looking at more effective and holistic approaches, but we cannot leave victims without protection; those are two very different things.”
“I recognise the view and position of the NSPCC and the Children's Commissioner on injunctions against perpetrators or alleged perpetrators who are under 18 years of age. I wholeheartedly agree that we should not criminalise young people. However, could the amendment leave victims who have suffered abuse perpetrated by someone of that age with no recourse to a protective order that would prevent contact by a perpetrator who is 18 years old or older? It begs this question: is there an intention to provide those victims with a different kind of protection, and, if so, what does it look like? I speak with reference to subsection (5)(b)(i) and (ii). It is my understanding that that wording means that a 16-year-old victim would not be able to access a protective order against their 17-year-old abuser.”
“To proceed with a legislative gap in Operation Encompass between children who attend a primary school that is in the big school or campus and those who attend nursery or preschool away from it would be a mistake. As all of us will know, not all preschools are attached to primary or post-primary schools, and there should not be an arbitrary distinction of where a call could be made by the PSNI after an incident for the sake of children's well-being. As we know, early years are a crucial developmental time for children, and I welcome the necessary detail in amendment No 1. <BR /> <BR />With regard to amendment No 2 — I raised this at Committee — I am still a bit uneasy about the approach taken to age limits.”
“I, too, am glad that we are here at Further Consideration Stage. From the outset, I give a warning that this will not be a short speech. <BR /> <BR />First, I acknowledge and commend the Department for its proposed changes to the Committee amendment that was made at Consideration Stage to deal with Operation Encompass, which is encapsulated in amendment Nos 1 and 8. At Consideration Stage, I, alongside other Members, mentioned that we needed to look at the inclusion of other educational settings that children and young people attend, such as preschools and nurseries. I am glad that, after raising the matter in Committee with the Department, the Minister is bringing forward the relevant provisions.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I will repeat my earlier intervention. Does the Member agree with me that the potential misuse of the waiver is an issue only if the Department does not produce the relevant guidance and processes to prevent it from happening?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Does the Member not agree that the potential misuse of the waiver will be an issue only if the Department does not produce the relevant guidance and processes to prevent it happening and that everything that the Department needs to do is in subsection (3) of the Minister's amendment?”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. Can she outline how many times the existing discretionary power of the director of the Legal Services Agency has been used in the higher courts?”
“The ban is designed to deter smugglers, who often abuse the pet travel scheme to bring animals into the UK to be sold, often from across the Channel, and to deter them from using Northern Ireland as a staging post to get pups and kittens into the UK from the Republic of Ireland. <BR /> <BR />I will finish by saying that dogs and cats are not a commodity to be abused and sold for profit. They are living and breathing animals who, with the right owner, can enjoy a lifetime of happiness. We should all think about that at this special time of year and do our best to get that message out to others. I commend the petition to the House.”
“<BR /> <BR />In effect, Lucy's law for Northern Ireland will mean that cats and dogs under six months old will be sold only through breeders directly, must be born and reared in a safe environment with their mother and must be sold from their place of birth. Third-party sellers such as pet shops and commercial dealers will not be able to sell young pups unless they have bred them themselves. Lucy's law is designed to target large commercial breeders who often work out of warehouses or caravans filled with animals in dirty and disgusting conditions who are being bred on a large scale.”
“Lucy's law is named after the Cavalier King Charles Spaniel who suffered multiple health conditions, including a curved spine, bald patches, epilepsy and fused hips as a result of spending most of her life in a cage being used to breed litters of puppies at a Welsh puppy farm. In 2013, Lucy was rescued by Lisa Garner, who then took to social media to spread the word about the conditions that breeding dogs like Lucy were kept in, gaining huge support from across society. Lucy was able, because of Lisa, to spend the last three years of her life in a happy, loving home where she was able to enjoy everything that she was tragically denied in her past. I thank all those who give their time and their home to rescued animals in Northern Ireland.”
“Puppy farming is a cruel and inhumane practice that seeks to make profit from the misery of animals who are bred in horrendous conditions and often lack the basic needs of food and water. They are denied adequate healthcare, and young pups are often ripped from their mother long before they are ready to leave the litter.”
“The petition that I bring today calls for the introduction of legislation similar to Lucy's law, and, as of this morning, the petition has been signed by 2,935 people. The petition calls on the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs to bring forward legislation similar to Lucy's law, which came into effect in England in April. <BR /> <BR />In a letter to Belfast City Council this February, the Minister outlined that he intended to take cognisance of the change in the law in England with a view to considering a way forward for Northern Ireland and that he remained committed to ensuring that Northern Ireland has high animal welfare standards and that the well-being of pets remained protected.”
“I thank the Member for her answer. The Member touched on this, but she will be aware that, in recent weeks, plenary sittings have gone on into the wee hours of the morning. As she outlined, under the working-time regulations, workers are entitled to a rest period of not less than 11 hours in each 24-hour period during which they work for an employer. Will the Commission ensure that staff who are here until 3.00 am are not back at 8.00 am or 9.00 am?”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. Why was a population of 10,000 chosen as the threshold beyond which air quality assessment would be conducted, even though that would exclude most rural areas from assessment and risk agricultural pollution not being fully measured?”
“Does the Minister support the installation of technology, such as body scanners, in the Northern Ireland Prison Service so that people who are, or, importantly, are not, carrying illegal drugs and substances on their person can be identified quickly?”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. On Mr Aiken's comment about an independent chairman, an independent chairwoman would be good too. <BR /> <BR />The Minister will be aware that we have an opportunity not only to build back better from COVID but to tackle our climate emergency through a just transition. What consideration will be given to a green, sustainable procurement by the board? Can it be mandatory? What role will there be for cooperative models in procurement, focusing on community wealth building and working with councils? Perhaps I can also ask what he means by the reference to "living wage" on page 5 of his statement.”
“It is complex — the role of the Executive Office may, indeed, be even more so — but I see no legitimate or convincing arguments for having eight spads in that Department. I would have supported a reduction to four as a reasonable and practical level of support for the work of the office, but I appreciate the reason for Mr Allister not moving that today. We fully support the removal of the junior Minister spad allocation. Here is hoping that three is, indeed, the magic number. <BR /> <BR />I will be short. We will support group 1, and we wish Mr Allister all the best with his Bill.”
“I do not understand how an upper scale of over 80 grand would not be an attractive salary for anyone with experience. We need to have a ceiling somewhere, as an interim, as outlined in the group 1 amendments. It is also right that there is greater transparency around their recruitment and any interests that they might have, given how close they are to the decision-making process. As Mr Allister has outlined, we have codes already. We had codes before, but codes are ignored. It is also right that, perhaps, we know who the spads are. <BR /> <BR />While I support amendment No 7, repealing the Civil Service Commissioners (Amendment) (Northern Ireland) Order in Council 2007, I also would have supported clause 2 as it stood. I stated earlier that I do not underestimate the role of Ministers, and I stand by that.”
“<BR /> <BR />On the specifics of today, the Green Party will — it will be no surprise — support all the amendments in group 1. The role and dominance of spads in our Executive has been, rightly, viewed with suspicion. Special advisers are a feature of most Governments, and few could argue that the provision of specialist advice to Ministers is not beneficial to good government, but we need to have good government. It is right that checks and balances are in place to ensure that their role and remit is as it should be. Spads are temporary appointments, so it is only right that they are treated like civil servants, both in pay and in their abidance to the code of conduct. As Mr Allister stated, it does not mean that they do not become political appointments.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. Yes, of course, there is such a need. As I said, we need to go further than this legislation. Every action that we take must recognise the need for openness and transparency. <BR /> <BR />There is an onus on every one of us. The job of governing is not an easy one, and I do not underestimate the role of our Ministers and the work that they must undertake, particularly in dealing with the unprecedented situation that we are in with the pandemic and all that it entails, Brexit on the horizon and climate breakdown looming. However, if we are to tackle the challenges of our time, we need proper oversight processes in place so that our politics are not beset by controversy and crisis.”
“There is an onus on every one of us to recognise the need for action and to promote transparency and accountability in every action that we take as elected representatives —.”
“It has been made very clear that what happened with RHI was not a one-off mistake; it was merely indicative of a system and culture that failed to put accountability, transparency and effective governance at its root. For these institutions to put this front and centre, there is much more to be done. Transformation must happen. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the words of the head of the so-called reformist wing of the DUP, Mr Frew, as he makes the case for change, but we must go further. The earlier discussion between Mr Wells and Mr Frew on the internal workings of the DUP was fascinating. However, the RHI report cannot be left to gather dust with all the other reports and strategies that came before it.”
“<BR /> <BR />I, like Mr Wells, have read the RHI inquiry report. It was light Christmas reading. I note that it concluded:”
“When the Executive were restored in January of this year, we all hoped that lessons had been learned and that we would not see a return to the type of governance that brought us RHI, Red Sky, the National Asset Management Agency (NAMA) and a host of other shenanigans that we are yet to know about. We hoped that the lofty words and the wish list in 'New Decade, New Approach' meant just that. Unfortunately, I remain unconvinced, and, crucially, the public remain unconvinced. We need confidence in the institutions, we need accountability, and we must have transparency. I have absolutely no confidence that we would ever see legislation such as this come from the Executive. Who brings forward this legislation is not relevant. What is relevant is what it seeks to do, as many Members have suggested.”
“I, too, thank the Member for bringing forward this vital legislation. I am glad to speak to its Consideration Stage today. <BR /> <BR />At Second Stage, we supported the principles of the Bill. Gladly, we also support the amendments in group 1. I note, disappointing as it is, that some in the Chamber will not support the Bill and would rather leave this to simple codes <BR /> <BR />It was said earlier that it is not the place of a Back-Bench MLA to table legislation such as this and that this is not how anyone should judge legislation and its effects on the running of the House. In response to that, I ask this: why not?”
“I thank the Minister for his answers so far. Security of supply will also be impacted by climate breakdown. Minister, will environmental and climate impact be reflected in procurement processes and policies going forward to ensure that the policy is sustainable? For example, will a sustainability clause or criteria be considered for security of supply?”
“I thank the Minister for his answers so far. The Minister will be aware that one of the key issues arising as a result of COVID-19 in general is effective and meaningful communication to ensure that education can continue in the safest manner for our teachers and pupils. Will the Minister detail what formal consultation he has had with teachers and trade unions regarding exams and school reopening in general since schools reopened in September?”
“The Minister will know that I have many questions on this, but, for now, can he outline what consultation was done with the school, the board of governors, and the parents about this move as well as with the wider community? Will he commit to meet me, a group of parents and interested parties regarding the proposed school move?”
“A number of financial assistance schemes were outlined today by the Finance Minister, as we have heard. Can the Minister outline whether any of that funding will be allocated to fill the gap and give support to those who have received nothing to date? If not, why not?”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. In response to a question for written answer to my colleague Clare Bailey, the Minister of Finance indicated on 30 October that his Department was still consulting on technical documents relating to nearly zero energy requirements. What is the Minister's assessment of social housing being built without the relevant regulations and technical documents being in place in the Department of Finance?”
“The Minister will be aware that people are much more likely to get a PIP award if they have support from another person or from the independent advice sector. Will the Minister support a list of independent advice sector organisations or advice lines being sent out with the PIP form and the overturn rate for mandatory reconsiderations being made available in the information that is sent out on how best to challenge a decision so that more people can make more of an informed decision about whether to take the matter further?”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. While he will be aware of businesses that have not received support payments weeks after they were promised them, he will also be aware that some have fallen through the gaps and have been unable to trade since March. Those people have received no financial help from the Executive. What discussions has the Minister had with the Minister for the Economy to make sure that there are no gaps and that the people who run those businesses get the financial support that they need? Do the new allocations fill those gaps?”
“I thank the Minister for coming to the House today. I also thank all those working in the NHS in dealing with the health of our population. As we know, not all heroes wear capes. There was mention of the opportunity for a better Christmas, yet, over the weekend, we heard from Professor Gabriel Scally, a public health expert at the University of Bristol, who said, on the Prime Minister's proposals, that there was no point in having a merry Christmas only to bury friends and relations in January and February. There seems to be some disconnect. When will details on Christmas be issued to the public? Will the Minister support the establishment of an expert task force to increase transparency and to take the politics out of decision-making on COVID-19?”
“Guidance could play a key role in making sure that there are no issues for statutory agencies collecting relevant data and information. <BR /> <BR />I have taken up enough time, Mr Speaker. I urge Members to support amendment Nos 22, 25 and 26 for the reasons outlined.”
“<BR /> <BR />I want to pick up on amendment 19 before I bring my remarks to a close. The Department is working up guidance with stakeholders, which is crucial to the Bill and its outworkings, and we heard that very loudly and clearly from the PSNI. I know that the Committee does not have a role in drawing the guidance up, but I encourage the Minister and her Department to share it with the Committee for information as soon as possible. We must ensure that the guidance reflects the contents of the Bill and does not focus on one area at the expense of others and that it is a good road map that outlines the specifics needed for various agencies, especially the PSNI, to which the guidance will be crucial. I therefore welcome the Minister tabling the amendment in relation to guidance and that the guidance will be kept under review.”
“I note the Chair and the Deputy Chair's comments and the comments of MLAs on the amendment, and I think that I was tempting fate earlier on ongoing support from Paul Frew. However, as the saying goes, "All good things must come to an end". <BR /> <BR />I will again make to you all the argument that we made in the debates on previous groups of amendments: if it is not in the Bill, there is no guarantee that it will be done. If the wording needs to be worked on to make it functional at Further Consideration Stage to get support from other parties, it can surely remain here via passing the amendment at Consideration Stage in order to allow it to be worked on at a later date. If it needs tidying up, let us do that, but that is the same argument that we successfully made in debates on previous groups of amendments tonight.”
“I am not being prescriptive about who or what agency collects the data or how it should be collected. It might be the PSNI or the PPS that collects it, but it might not. It could be the courts, or it could be done through multi-agency risk assessment conferences (MARAC) involving all the key statutory authorities. It could be done on a collaborative basis, and I will argue that it should be done in a victim-focused and sensitive way. I accept that there might need to be some tidying up at Further Consideration Stage of the second section of amendment 25. I would certainly welcome the help of the Departmental Solicitor's Office or the Office of Legislative Council to do so.”
“What if, for example, we got evidence like the submission that we heard from the Migrant Centre NI? That is a small community organisation that does not have enough budget allocated for the work that it does, in my opinion, but it does fantastic work. In its evidence session, it outlined:”
“Why is it needed here? That, again, is about the operation of the law after the Bill receives Royal Assent. We are saying that we need the data so that we can develop evidence-based policy and responses. We know that resource allocation and funding go hand in hand with proving data and numbers. We know that funding and resources should be granted based on need, in theory and in practice, but we also know that that does not always happen. However, what if we did not have the information to hand to know where the need was? What if the old way of collecting and publishing data and information was not sufficient enough to show the need? What if there were people who did not come forward, or, for example, did not know how to engage with services, let alone report to the criminal justice agencies and go through those processes?”
“That section, as we know, aims to change the practices of government and public authorities so that the quality of opportunity and good relations are central to policymaking and service delivery. The:”
“That is also self-explanatory. How will we know whether the aggravation is being used in the disposal of the offence? We need to know that the legislation in its entirety is being utilised. We need to know whether it is working and whether it needs to be amended. <BR /> <BR />The second part of the amendment requests "information on A and B"; that is, the alleged victim and perpetrator:”
“Amendment 25 has two parts. The first part would add data to be collected on reporting, specifying:”
“It is self-explanatory; we need to know the number of offences within each police district, as recorded. It is my understanding that the Ministers are supportive of the amendment. I am glad that other Members stated their support for it and that it is possible for the PSNI to report on that after the legislation comes into force. That information already exists, which I welcome.”
“<BR /> <BR />I tabled amendment Nos 25 and 26. Again, both amendments are friendly to the Committee's. I will take amendment No 26 first. It adds that:”
“<BR /> <BR />The Department advised the Committee that it recognises the importance of robust data and is reviewing this in relation to the offence. How to best secure this and what will be reported on is being considered in conjunction with partner agencies as part of the operationalisation of the new offence. However, the Department has indicated that it is unlikely to be possible to record the detail that some organisations outlined to the level of an individual victim. <BR /> <BR />I am glad that the Minister is in agreement with the Committee on amendment No 20 and the need for it. I welcome the fact that there will be a regular and ongoing liaison with partners, following the introduction of the offence, to ensure that as much information as possible is used to consider how the new provisions are operating.”
“If we cannot track the legislation and its effects — what happens to someone who comes into contact with the PSNI from first contact to ending up in the courts, to see how this has been for them; the time that it has taken; what has happened; how the court's business was managed and arranged; the number of cases and so on — how will we scrutinise its effectiveness? <BR /> <BR />Scotland has already reported on its Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Act 2018 and on the offence in terms of public prosecution, which is different — I appreciate that they are different systems. However, if we can show through annual statistics how effective the Bill has been in comparison across all the bodies that are working on it, that is something that we need to have; otherwise, we cannot measure it.”
“Conversations are going on in the Department, the PPS and the judiciary, and I welcome that, but, if we are working to see whether the Bill has been effective in getting prosecutions and the data does not add up across the three bodies that are actually charging the offence, how can we make sure that it is effective and doing what it needs to be doing if we are not collecting the same data and reporting on it in the same way? It also makes our job as Justice Committee members very difficult in the future. <BR /> <BR />For example, the police collect data on incidents and offences, but that is not necessarily the same data that is collected by the PPS. We need to look at it as a whole system, because it is one.”
“Indeed, at the Committee deliberations, I explained the need for robust and detailed data collection. <BR /> <BR />The police collect statistics on certain offences and publish them in a certain way. That is not the same data that is collected by the PPS or the judiciary. For the Bill to be effective, there needs to be a broader data collection about those who are involved in the legislation. That is, for example, those who are A and B, those who have a child aggravator applied, and the circumstances around A and B. If the different parts of the criminal justice system are working to prosecute for an offence in the legislation but are not collecting or collating data in the same way, how can we report on it effectively?”
“The importance of strengthening data collection regarding incidents of domestic abuse and violence, in general, and, more specifically, in relation to the implementation of the legislation was raised by a number of organisations. There is a need for data to track the journey of abuse investigations through the criminal justice system, including the number of initial reports; the number of referrals to the PPS; how many reach different stages of the court process and how many reach prosecution; what the resulting remedy is; and how many involve repeat offenders, to enable an accurate assessment of the effectiveness of the system. I raised that, early on, as an issue for data collection and monitoring of the legislation from an operational side.”
“Let us take, for instance, Migrant Centre NI, which stated rightly that the Bill could be the best legislation that you can possibly get on the books, but, if there are insufficient resources for organisations, such as the PSNI, that support victims and for getting information to victims about who can support them, how they can access that support and what it looks like, and without a coordinated and holistic effort, the best legislation will all be for naught. That is reflected in so much of the evidence that I have heard, and that is why I believe that the amendment would strengthen the Bill. <BR /> <BR />Amendment Nos 20, 24, 25 and 26 are on data collection and reporting on the legislation.”