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 23 of 29.
“I thank the Minister for giving way. Does she agree that, given the UK Government's aims, it is simply impossible to satisfy both the internal market Bill proposals and the NI protocol, unless the UK remains aligned with the EU internal market regulations for goods?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Although I appreciate what the Member is saying, does he agree that, given that we bailed out the banks in 2008, we can do a wee bit more and bail out our people?”
“We need a just transition to protect workers and create jobs, and that will require investment in people, education and apprenticeships. We need widespread and far-reaching structural change, including cooperatives and community-based models of business, to implement a fair and just transition to a low-carbon economy backed by green investment. <BR /> <BR />The Assembly has already backed a green new deal, and it was agreed with New Decade, New Approach. Where are the green jobs? Where is our economic plan and a just transition within it? Whilst we welcome the call to extend the furlough scheme, it is time for the Executive to pull the finger out, present the Assembly with a comprehensive economic plan and deliver green jobs for the future.”
“Where are the plans to create new jobs? How are the Executive using available funds and investment to drive forward economic recovery? Where is the imagination? What about the underspend? There are new ideas and new ways of dealing with economic recession and increased unemployment here. We do not need to look too far for opportunities presenting themselves. Issues that, we know, we need to deal with will necessitate job creation: for example, dealing with fuel poverty and the poor condition of housing here. The mass retrofitting of houses that is required is a perfect example of what the Executive should be doing and investing their energy in, not focusing on business as usual. We need green jobs and a green stimulus package from the Executive.”
“Mrs Judith Cree set up her own business in Holywood in April 2018 but did not meet the criteria for the schemes set up by Westminster or any implemented by the Executive here. Alongside others, including Excluded NI, she has lobbied for assistance in line with Scotland from the Department for the Economy and the Executive, and they have been turned down repeatedly. She has also lobbied for the scope of the criteria to be changed but has been turned down on that too. She was informed that she was not able to avail herself of as much support as others and that it was impossible to provide funding for every scenario that has presented itself during the pandemic by the Minister. <BR /> <BR />Why are the Executive not listening and acting to help those who need it? What are the plans to protect jobs under threat?”
“What about those not included in that figure who are already struggling, those who have had their hours cut and are in precarious and unstable working conditions, those relying already on our social security system, those who are having to give up work or are unable to return because of childcare decisions, those who are self-employed and those who did not qualify for the grants and assistance offered by Westminster or by the Executive here? They have been left behind and excluded, and extending the furlough scheme does nothing to help them. <BR /> <BR />Let us take, for example, a constituent of mine who has been left behind. I am glad that she has given permission for me to mention her today.”
“We know that the magic money tree can be shaken when it suits, but it is not a long-term solution; what we need is imagination. We need to think differently, and we need a bespoke economic plan for the people whom we represent. <BR /> <BR />The motion's call to action is clear and something that I support, but what difference will it really make in light of the British Government already refusing to extend the scheme? The key question for the Assembly is this: what are the Executive's plans to create new employment opportunities for the estimated 100,000 people who will be unemployed by the end of the year?”
“I would like to say, "Hello" to Mr Dickson, whom I have not yet met. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the motion and the amendment. Extending the furlough scheme would, of course, go some way to provide a safety net for many workers who have been affected by the pandemic. It is inconceivable to expect businesses that have been unable to reopen or those who are not able to open fully to survive without any further support when they have had little, if any, income since March. Grants only cover so much, and loans just kick the financial problems down the line. Many trade unions have rightly been calling for the extension of the furlough scheme for months to protect jobs, livelihoods and families across Northern Ireland. It is a no-brainer.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Does he agree that social and sports clubs that cannot open under the regulations also require additional support, otherwise they might never reopen, and we would lose vital community hubs in our towns and villages?”
“May I ask the Minister for an update on the delivery of a centre for restorative excellence in Northern Ireland to contribute to a reduction in reoffending interventions?”
“How much funding is allocated to the bicycle strategy for this financial year?”
“If the Minister's prime concern remains that young people in Northern Ireland are not disadvantaged, why were we dragged through this mess, and what are we going to do? What are the Executive's plans to address the inequalities that are evident in the figures for our school-leavers? Will there be a review of what happened this year? Will an impact assessment be published? Will there be an inquiry? What about next year? What about the AS levels? What about university places and clearing? <BR /> <BR />This is not just about grades; it is about a totally unfair system and the need for the long-term transformation from assessment and qualifications that must happen and an Executive who actually do something practical about it.”
“We talk much about aces, supporting our young people and educational underachievement, but the current approach is embedding division and disadvantage further, ensuring that the divide continues. Our job as public servants is to serve the next generation, not to destroy it, and I remind our young people that exam results do not make you as a person. They are not the whole picture, and they will not wholly determine everything that you do in your life. There are certainly no exam qualifications needed to be in this Chamber. <BR /> <BR />Last year, 158 young people left school with no GCSEs, and 131 left with no formal qualification of any kind. How many will there be this year? How many will there be next year? Those who are entitled to free school meal payments are twice as likely to be recorded as unemployed after they leave school.”
“Despite all the barriers that our young person could have faced, they managed to get to the examination stage this year, working hard to deal with COVID, lockdown and adapting to the new normal — that is if they have the technology in place to do so or the support networks at home. <BR /> <BR />1.45 pm <BR /> <BR />On top of everything else that we as a society demand from our children and young people and regardless of COVID, an unjust system is imposed that standardises them and bases their academic performance in part on the basis of other people, some of whom they have never met, and not on the individual's work. Some defended a system that most of us did not understand, let alone got sight of, rather than defending our children and young people.”
“Maybe they are one of the 25% of children who are growing up in poverty in Northern Ireland, from one of 103,000 families struggling to make ends meet, impacted by austerity and by the horrific so-called reform of social security. Maybe the young person does not get a nutritious meal at the end of the day. Maybe they are one of the 15,000 children who were fed using an emergency food package last year alone. Maybe they have additional needs. Maybe there is abuse in the home. Maybe there is drug or alcohol addiction. Perhaps our young person is one of the 35,000 who went to the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services for mental health support in 2018. Perhaps they are one of the one in 10 in the classroom who has a diagnosable mental health illness.”
“Maybe our young person did not do the transfer test or did not do well enough in it to get into the school that their friends go to. Maybe they get a place in their third or fourth preference school or whatever place they can get because all the others were oversubscribed. Maybe they face other barriers. Maybe they do not feel like they fit in and are subject to bullying, like nearly half of students in Northern Ireland. Maybe they have freckles, or maybe, like me, they are not as tall as their peers. Maybe they are LGBTQ. Maybe they have a disability. Maybe they do not have English as their first language. Maybe the young person is a carer, too, has additional at-home responsibilities or is in care themselves.”
“Let us take a moment and think about the educational journey that they could have been on. Hopefully, our child gets a nursery place, with good-quality, funded childcare. However, without proper early years provision or a childcare strategy, maybe our young person's start in life is not as good as it needs to be. Then, our child attends school, at age 4, separately; the earliest in Europe. Some will be able to get into their first preference primary school; others will not. Maybe our young person has recognised special educational needs, or maybe they will spend years trying to get statemented. They will receive a uniform and a free school meals payment. Maybe the school is underfunded and under-resourced. <BR /> <BR />Then on to big school.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I welcome you back. I share in offering my condolences to the wider SDLP family. <BR /> <BR />All this could have been avoided today. Yesterday's decision is a welcome result for the voices of teachers, parents, pupils and students, and credit to them for demanding an equitable resolution. Recent events have brought incredible distress. There will not be one MLA here who has not been contacted by someone asking for help. Every summer, we deal with students who are not treated fairly by the system, so this is not a new issue. We have the worst levels of students leaving education with no qualifications. <BR /> <BR />The grades, the algorithms and the workings out that have been discussed for the last couple of days and here today are actually children and young people's lives.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Will he agree that COVID has exacerbated existing disadvantages in the system, given that just over half of pupils in non-grammar schools scored at least five GCSEs at A* to C in comparison to grammar schools, where that figure was nearly 95%?”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. The junior Minister stated earlier that all parties in the Chamber had input to the 'New Decade, New Approach' document, which is incorrect. Not all parties were part of that. <BR /> <BR />To get back to the matter at hand and the comments made by Mr Beattie, Mr Wells and Mr Aiken, what is the basis or advice to the Executive stating that this legislation must be enacted before the ministerial code is amended? Given that no application can actually progress without this, what happens if the ministerial code is not changed in the way that is needed for further scrutiny of the House, given that a change in the code can be subject to amendment?”
“However, for me, that is not what this legislation is an example of. This is bad government, and bad policy will flow from it. We have had no time to consider the full implications that this might have. It is supposedly to prevent the Executive from becoming de facto a decision-making body for planning applications, so why was the entire Bill not limited to planning. This is bigger than it has been made out to be, and we need time to properly consider it. There is still no justification for accelerated passage. <BR /> <BR />The Green Party does not support the Bill. There are too many questions and far too few answers.”
“Through the Bill, if the Executive have reduced cross-cutting to mean only when there is a significant impact on another Department's statutory responsibility, what does that mean for previous legal obligations to work together, such as on the Children's Services Co-operation Act? What impact at all, outside planning, has been looked at and adequately tested legally? Have unforeseen circumstances been correctly thought out? <BR /> <BR />As I stated yesterday when speaking on the amendments, we should be encouraging better collective and collaborative working, not giving Departments cover to plough ahead with working in silos. 'New Decade, New Approach' stated:”
“I thank the Member for his intervention, and I agree that the planning process does need to be completely reformed. I look forward to any engagement on that and any input that I can make to that. <BR /> <BR />Again, the legislation has been posed as being about planning issues, but, in my opinion, it opens up a very big can of worms down the line that we might not be seeing now. <BR /> <BR />The Bill will change the Northern Ireland Act, yet we have little detail on what the consequences of it might be, apart from it being painted as a great opportunity for future employment, which is highly questionable and raises more than a red flag. Is that it? What else does it do?”
“That was an immediate and very real threat faced by many people here as we implemented the health protection regulations. This has, again, been presented as a technical Bill that is only about planning issues, but —.”
“Just to reiterate, if it was so important for all these long-standing applications to be progressed and for the legislation to be passed, why was it not one of the first pieces of legislation brought by the Executive in February? Why was it not in New Decade, New Approach? I see no reference to it there. <BR /> <BR />The role of the House is to scrutinise legislation and take decisions that need to be taken throughout these so-called unprecedented times. We have been denied our full scrutiny role through the use of accelerated passage. Now, some legislation needed to be enacted quickly over the past few months. However, I do not see the urgency of this Bill being needed in the same way as the Private Tenancies (Coronavirus Modifications) Act was needed to ensure that people were not evicted during the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. Mr Wells can reference whatever he wants, as we know, and has already done so. I do not have the specifics on Casement Park, even if it is part of the elusive list that is on the Minister's desk.”
“What major planning applications will be made in the next few weeks that could not wait until after the summer recess? Are the Executive telling us that hugely important planning applications are waiting to be signed off by the current Minister for Infrastructure that cannot be done without the legislation?”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. I absolutely share those concerns about the planning process. There are too many barriers for people, not enough consultation and not the right sort of consultation. Certainly, my party would push for equal rights of appeal in the planning process. <BR /> <BR />I will continue. The Bill is not actually about the planning process. We have a lot to do on that. Yes, we have experienced long waits for planning applications through the system. Mr Muir has outlined some specifics that are currently with the Minister for Infrastructure. Most Members will have experience of other issues with the Planning Service, of which there are many. However, the Bill will not change that. Mr Wells is correct. It is probably the first time that I have agreed with him in the Chamber.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. I accept that we do not have the legal advice, as he already knows, and that the code is crucial. It seems to be a case of putting the cart before the horse. I am sure that the Member would agree. <BR /> <BR />Does it deepen the silo mentality and silo decision-making by Ministers and their Departments? Many Members commented at Second Stage on the need for quick decisions to be made on planning applications that are in the system and those currently on the Minister's desk. However, are quick decisions the best decisions, especially when it comes to the planning system and developments of the scale, size and impact that we are discussing?”
“If that is so and the Bill is that important for investment in our infrastructure, why was it not brought forward as soon as the Executive were reformed earlier this year? Why is it being brought forward now, during what is supposed to be recess, and we are here attempting to pass the Bill with no time for scrutiny? <BR /> <BR />On the surface, the Bill is about planning decisions. It has been stated that it stems from the Buick judgement on the incinerator. However, could the passage of the legislation open up unintended consequences? Has that been considered? As I said, when Mr Stalford was kind enough to give way to me, we have no information. I cannot make a judgement on that because I have not seen the legal advice.”
“That was famously and controversially invoked five years ago over the Belfast metropolitan area plan (BMAP), yet that planning policy is still waiting for Executive approval and is now out of date. <BR /> <BR />The process is here yet again. Accelerated passage has been sought for legislation that has had limited scrutiny and no consultation. That has been a recurring pattern over the past few months with regard to mostly coronavirus-related legislation. Now, we are told that, if it is not resolved quickly, that could have important consequences for the economy and, particularly, the pressing need to promote investment in our infrastructure. We are told that the Committee agreed the need for accelerated passage in part because of the current COVID-19 pandemic.”
“<BR /> <BR />On 6 July, we were told that a number of significant planning decisions are expected during the remainder of this year that could lead to significant investment and employment opportunities that are being deferred or lost because of the Bill not being enacted, but is there any information on what they are? Do they actually lead to employment opportunities, which is how this has been sold to us, and for whom? The Bill is being proposed as necessary to help government to function quicker and more efficiently. However, without an agreed Programme for Government, all potentially controversial decisions will still have to go to the Executive for approval. What if one of those controversial decisions is on a planning matter? Would it still be within the remit of the Minister for Infrastructure to take that decision on their own?”
“Would an impact on climate and the environment be considered a cross-cutting matter requiring a decision to be taken by the Executive rather than one Minister? Planning decisions that have significant climate impact would naturally cut across many departmental interests and across their statutory duties, such as the Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee and Minister, and the Economy, Finance, Infrastructure and Health Departments. One can make the argument that all planning decisions on our built environment can have climate impacts. Where does that lead to in the context of the Bill? What about the Aarhus convention?”
“The issue has been continually raised, and I will continue to ask, like Mr Wells and Mr Beattie, "What is the rush?". <BR /> <BR />We are told that the Bill is necessary to clarify the circumstances in which a Minister is required to refer a matter to the Executive Committee where that matter may be cross-cutting, significant or controversial. We are also told that it is about planning. Now, we are also told that it is about getting clarity, of which I see none here. Who decides what is cross-cutting, significant or controversial? Will that be set and clarified? Is there an appeal mechanism? What, in this case, is "more than incidental"? What is an "interest"? How does this relate, for example, to climate commitments and our environment?”
“Earlier, Mr Stalford kindly gave way to me, and I was able to mention not having had sight of the legal advice from the DSO and the Attorney General, like the majority of Members. It is difficult for my party colleague and me to see the merits of this accelerated legislation, so I will take some time, despite having spoken on the Bill and the amendments yesterday, because this, for us, is important legislation. <BR /> <BR />I, along with others, have asked why the Executive are intent on pushing the legislation through at this time and asked whether consideration has been given to what this means for the powers of the Executive. Certainly, there is still no clarification of the timing issues and no reason given why we must have the legislation for the summer.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Will the Member agree with me that not all Members have had sight of the legal advice that he refers to?”
“It is great to get to ask so many questions. I thank the Minister for answering them. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the roll-out of the COVID-19 app, the announcement of which has been done in conjunction with the ICO. I previously raised questions with the Minister about the legal advice that was given about the roll-out of the app and data protection. Will the Minister confirm that the collection and storage of data in the app will be based on a decentralised model, whereby data is only held locally on your phone?”
“The Minister will be aware that many people are having ongoing issues with accessing physical appointments with their GPs. I have written to him and the South Eastern Trust on that issue. Some of my constituents have been offered telephone appointments, which have not resulted in any diagnoses or referrals, and some have been told that they should probably go private. At what stage will the resumption of GP services, with all the necessary PPE and safety measures, if there is an indicative date for the next stage of the recovery programme, be announced?”
“I thank the Minister for his statement today, and I thank all the hardworking health staff for their ongoing work in our NHS. The Minister will be aware of the impact of coronavirus on maternity services and antenatal care. According to the latest information on the maternity website, the South Eastern Trust says that all educational classes are cancelled, and there is no information in the Minister's statement or online on when they will resume. Parenting classes are extremely important in supporting the parenting journey and are part of a wide range of services that are essential for women preparing to give birth. Can the Minister provide an indicative date for when he expects the resumption of the normal service provision of antenatal care and maternity services?”
“I thank the Minister for his statement and for his engagement with the youth representatives from the Northern Ireland Youth Forum yesterday. The Minister will know that without enough food or the right food, children's educational underachievement will continue. Hunger and malnutrition affect a child's ability to concentrate, to take in and retain new information and make progress in their learning, and we know that that is happening across Northern Ireland. Will the terms of reference and scope of the panel include food insecurity, food poverty and the impact of austerity, as well as the continuation and expansion of free school meal payments to ensure that children have at least one good meal per day?”
“We need a full and informed, comprehensive debate with Assembly scrutiny. I have heard no reasons given by any Members from both sides of the Chamber and in the House today for accelerated passage being required for this. If it were needed, it would have been introduced in February. This is an example of a bad Government, and bad policy will flow from it.”
“How will it fit in with our wider responsibilities for the environment? That is not confined to one Department. Planning decisions will, of course, have more than one incidental, significant or controversial impact on other Departments and Ministers' responsibilities. You could and can make the argument that every such planning decision will have an impact on the environment. <BR /> <BR />Where does this leave us? We should be encouraging better collective and collaborative working, not giving Departments cover to plough ahead with working in silos or isolating one through these amendments, recognising that there are issues with the way in which the Bill is written and the powers that it confers on our Ministers and Departments. This is not the time to be passing powers in this Bill.”
“<BR /> <BR />Whilst I understand the rationale behind the amendments — to try to remove the reference to other Ministers — it still, for me, opens up the same question of what this means for the exercising of power and decisions by the Executive, going forward. The amendments seem to remove some of the main problems identified but leave the specifics to do with planning, so does that mean that the Department for Infrastructure and the Minister for Infrastructure will be exempt and will enjoy the increased power and authority? Would the amendments mean that the Infrastructure Minister may take decisions on their own on those matters but nobody else can? How would that fit in with the collective responsibility of the Executive, even if the Bill were amended?”
“We have had no time to consider the full implications of the Bill or, indeed, the amendments, and the Executive Office Committee spent only minutes discussing this on 1 July, which is hardly enough given the implications and the reality that this is a change to the Northern Ireland Act and the St Andrews Agreement. The Bill was and is being sold as a minor technical Bill to regularise an anomaly identified by the Buick case and to stop the Executive becoming a de facto decision-making body for planning applications. Why, then, was the Bill not limited to planning? The fact that the amendments have been tabled shows that the Bill appears to be much more significant than we were told by the Executive Office, and we need time to properly consider it. There is absolutely no justification for accelerated passage.”
“It is supposed to limit the grounds on which legal challenge can be taken against a decision made by the Executive or individual Ministers and outline the processes by which planning decisions can be taken by the Minister for Infrastructure. It is also to amend the Northern Ireland Act 1998 to deal with any significant or controversial matters that are clearly outside the scope of the Programme for Government — that is, of course, if we ever have one. It leads to scenarios where any Minister can decide matters without recourse to the Executive unless it affects the statutory responsibilities of another Department more than incidentally. <BR /> <BR />The amendments today are supposed to limit the proposed changes to purely planning matters by removing the reference to other Ministers, but do they do that?”
“I suppose that I will have to mention Mr Bullick, like every other Member has, but with the caveat that neither I nor the Green Party has spoken to him or engaged with him on the matter. However, I am glad that his comments, on whatever platform they were made, have encouraged other Members to realise the issues in the Bill, that the Bill is not just about planning and that there are wider implications included here. <BR /> <BR />Junior Minister Lyons, in introducing the Bill to the House on 6 July, stated that the Bill was intended to address the implications for ministerial and Executive decision-making of the judgement in what is known as the Buick case, which was brought against the Department for Infrastructure's grant of planning permission for a waste incinerator during the time that the Assembly was suspended.”
“Given the track record of illegal dumping in Northern Ireland, not to mention Mobuoy and now this ongoing in Belfast city centre, will the Minister commit to strengthening laws on illegal dumping and practices across the region?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. A Commissioner for Standards is due to be appointed soon. Does the Member agree with me that the First Minister and the deputy First Minister will surely have to move swiftly to appoint the other members of the panel for ministerial standards? Without that happening, there is no prospect of accountability in this Assembly, and we will continue to move from one political crisis to another.”
“We know that, before the outbreak of COVID-19, social care services were already in short supply and families with support met a high threshold to get any sort of care outside the home. Now, some of those services have disappeared, and unpaid carers have to cope alone, which adds to the burden and pressure. The Minister recently rightly stated that Northern Ireland faces a massive challenge in rebuilding health and social care in the wake of the first COVID-19 wave. We had a challenge before COVID, and we face an even bigger one now. Part of that is facing and dealing with the issues that existed, but we have an opportunity to build back better, to refocus and to do things differently, better than we did before. I commend the motion to the House.”
“Any future detailed plan should include investing in advancing plans for the upgrade of day centres, for example, to ensure that our buildings are suitable, such as at Ravara Training and Resource Centre in Bangor in my constituency, where parents and carers have been lobbying for years for upgrades and a new centre. Despite business cases being submitted as far back as 2012, they still wait. <BR /> <BR />Unpaid carers are vital to keeping vulnerable people safe, yet many fear that continuing 24/7 care will lead them to burnout. Many people in Northern Ireland were performing a caring role in difficult circumstances during and before COVID-19, alongside trying to hold down full-time jobs, take care of family responsibilities and look after their own mental and physical health.”