Connie Egan
North Down · Alliance Party · Northern Ireland
“As the Minister referenced in her opening remarks, creating a legislative assumption that hate crime victims are to be treated as being eligible for assistance on the grounds of fear and distress will give them deeper assurance that they will not be put into a traumatic and distressing situation in which they are forced to engage with the…”
“Being a victim of or a witness to a crime can be one of the most traumatic and challenging periods in one's life. It is therefore vital that, when entering the justice process and throughout it, people have confidence that it will be as fair, trauma-informed and comprehensive as possible.”
“Minister Long's proactive step to create that role before the legislation was introduced served the dual purpose of giving victims and witnesses as much of a voice as possible in the here and now and testing some of the responsibilities that could end up in primary legislation.”
“When I speak to victims who have engaged with the commissioner's office and ask them about their experience, their answer is always one that is grateful in nature. They highlight the importance of having someone independent who listens to them and engages with their experience.”
“Clause 27 addresses a future legal gap caused by the implementation of direct committal, limiting the power to dismiss charges involving the death or serious physical harm of a child or vulnerable person. <BR /> <BR />Part 3 provides for the creation of regulations and orders, including the commencement of the provisions.”
“Clauses 24 and 25 add offences that involve aggravation by hostility, otherwise known as "hate crimes", to the list for which witnesses are eligible for special measures.”
The complete record
Every one of 649 lines we hold for Connie Egan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 13.
“I agree. What the amendment does is send a strong message from the Chamber that we believe in freedom to practise, and freedom from, religion. I will come on to that in my next point. <BR /> <BR />One of the key reasons why I wanted to table the amendment was to promote equal standards of faith protections globally. Across the world, many people are persecuted for their faith under blasphemy laws. Earlier this year, I, alongside other MLAs, attended the launch of the 2026 Open Doors' World Watch List, which highlighted serious concerns from countries across the globe, such as Iran, Libya and Yemen, where Christians are being persecuted for practising their faith. As the Justice Minister already highlighted, the UK Government must be able to intervene and send a strong message that that persecution is totally unacceptable.”
“I want to make it clear that my amendment will not affect that. <BR /> <BR />The question that then follows is this: why do it? Why remove that offence that is never used? When I engaged with the police, I asked what would happen if someone rang them and reported blasphemy as a crime. They confirmed to me that they would have to investigate it and send a file to the PPS for consideration. I am sure that I am not the only one in the Chamber who thinks that there are better things that our Police Service could be doing.”
“They included many leaders of religious groups in Northern Ireland, such as the different Christian denominations, the Interfaith Forum, the Northern Ireland Humanists, the Evangelical Alliance and the National Secular Society. The positive reception from, and constructive dialogue with, all those groups and individuals on that and many other matters have been most welcome and incredibly valuable. <BR /> <BR />One of the questions that I was asked most during those consultation meetings was whether that legislation had ever actually been used for a prosecution in Northern Ireland. I, and many others, have looked into that. The answer is no. Instead, we have other laws that are used, such as the Public Order (Northern Ireland) Order 1987, which includes the criminal offence of incitement to religious hatred.”
“I have been deliberate in ensuring that it does not leave any vulnerabilities or gaps in protections for those who practise and value their faith here. We have a solid evidence base that we can look to in the rest of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland, as they have removed blasphemy from their statute books. I am confident that, if the amendment is passed, there will be no unforeseen consequences. <BR /> <BR />I thank the Bill Office team for supporting me in the drafting of my amendment and everyone who has engaged with me. Whilst there is no formal statutory duty to engage with stakeholders when tabling an amendment to an Executive Bill, I wanted the input of many across the region.”
“The fact that we still have blasphemy legislation on the statute books is outrageous to me, especially as this society does so much to promote freedom to practise, and freedom from, religion. We are the sole outlier on these islands where it is still the case. The legislation itself dates back to the 1800s. The legislation that I am targeting specifically with that removal includes sections from the Criminal Libel Act 1819, the Libel Act 1843, the Newspaper Libel and Registration Act 1881 and the Law of Libel Amendment Act 1888, as well as blasphemy common law offences. <BR /> <BR />I am not tabling the amendment to target or to scare any religious group into feeling that they are not welcome in Northern Ireland.”
“Amendment No 46 brings a new clause to the Bill that creates an offence of participating in the criminal activities of an organised crime group. Amendment No 47 creates an offence of directing those criminal activities. People who willingly participate in or direct criminal activities need to face the appropriate consequences. The significant penalties that are associated with those offences send a clear message from the Assembly that organised crime will not be tolerated. <BR /> <BR />I am particularly proud to propose amendment No 73 in the group, which abolishes the offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel in Northern Ireland. That is a long-standing policy position of the Alliance Party.”
“As she said in her opening remarks on the group, those new offences will create additional tools for law enforcement.”
“This is a really interesting group of amendments, and they cover a lot of ground. Many of them can bring a lot of strength to our justice system in Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />I will begin with Minister Long's proposals regarding the creation of new organised crime offences. We need to work together across our society to do all that we can to tackle the hold that organised crime, paramilitary or otherwise, has on our communities. I am proud to be in Alliance — a party that priorities tackling that at every turn. Whether it is damage to property, intimidation and coercion, hate crime, financial crime or threats to life, such behaviour has no place in our communities. With that being said, Alliance welcomes the amendments relating to organised crime from Minister Long.”
“Does the Member agree that one of the most disgusting things that we have learned from CARE's findings and our work in the all-party group on modern slavery and sexual exploitation has been that, on those sites, one user and one account can actually advertise hundreds of profiles? They are literally set up not just to facilitate trafficking but to profit from it. It is absolutely disgusting and wrong.”
“From our understanding, those are all matters relating to the operation of the provisions that will be addressed in updates to PACE codes, and in that vehicle would be subject to consultation with bodies such as the Human Rights Commission and the Commissioner for Children and Young People. For that reason, we will not be supporting the amendments. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 65, from the DUP, suggests a review within three years of section 21A coming into operation. That is not necessary when so much of the legislation has been in use for six years. What Alliance will support, however, is amendment No 52 from the Committee, which brings in a new clause to place a requirement on the Department of Justice to nominate a body to carry out a review of the use of live links by the police.”
“Those benefits are reflected in the support given for retaining the facility of remote hearings through using live links in responses to the Department of Justice's public consultation on the matter. The amendments will allow a live link direction to be given for any person's participation in proceedings. Importantly, the proposals include protection for the solemnity and integrity of proceedings no matter how a person is participating in court. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the addition of amendment No 60, which give courts and tribunals powers to vary or rescind a direction if it appears to be against the interests of justice. It is an incredibly important clause that ensures that the legislation is workable in all courts and tribunals scenarios. <BR /> <BR />I turn to amendment Nos 49 to 51 from Sinn Féin.”
“<BR /> <BR />I will now address the Minister of Justice's amendments regarding the use of live links and broadcast in court settings, which the Alliance Party will be supporting. Live links, otherwise known as audio and videoconferencing technology, have now been established in courts for years as a result of the pandemic, and I welcome the opportunity for us to put that into primary legislation instead of regularly revisiting the regulations via the Coronavirus Act 2020. That is not practical or sustainable governance for tools that are now so embedded in the infrastructure of our courtrooms. They provide access to justice in a number of senses, including where cases are deemed to be in the public interest and could be deemed appropriate for broadcast.”
“There are other sentencing options available to the judiciary when significant custodial time may be needed, and that was reflected in strong public and stakeholder support for the threshold that the Department proposes. With that in mind, we will not be supporting the amendment. <BR /> <BR />The Committee for Justice has tabled three amendments, amendment Nos 41, 42 and 43, that introduce vulnerabilities as a relevant consideration alongside age, maturity and needs when a decision to impose bail conditions is being taken by the police and courts. Alliance welcomes that and supports the intention of the Committee to ensure that the needs of young people are met when bail is being considered.”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak in the group 2 debate, which focuses on Part 2 and Part 3 of the Justice Bill. It is vital that our justice system works for everyone, and that includes the children who enter into it. <BR /> <BR />First, I will address the Democratic Unionist Party amendment No 44 regarding aligning the age range for new youth custody and supervision orders with the age of responsibility in Part 2 of the Bill. I and my party feel uncomfortable with the idea of potentially leaving children aged 13 and under within the scope of that new order as we do not wish custody to be used for that younger age group for anything other than very serious offences.”
“I think it pertinent to emphasise that the new biometric retention framework will not be commenced until regulations are in place, which will still take some time. Those regulations will be subject to further public consultation and Assembly scrutiny processes. The conversation is not one that will disappear after the Bill; instead, it will probably be discussed more and more frequently across our justice system. <BR /> <BR />With that in mind, Alliance is proud to support the provisions that Minister Long has proposed today. They will ensure that we have a proportionate and balanced human rights approach to biometric data retention and destruction across Northern Ireland.”
“I was also concerned to read about proposals that would diminish and take away the role of the PSNI in the appeal process regarding biometric material. Under current proposals, decisions could be reviewed by a different and more senior officer with no prior involvement. It is the belief of my party that disqualifying the PSNI from carrying out the appeal process is not workable or appropriate. <BR /> <BR />Lastly, I will address amendment No 38 under Gerry Carroll's name on the duty to provide information to persons whose biometric data is taken. It is my understanding that, as with some of the suggested provisions from Sinn Féin, that is to be addressed via PACE codes, subject to public consultation and Assembly scrutiny.”
“We do not find that to be proportionate and believe that the amendments would weaken the well-constructed retention and destruction regime, which has been designed with the interests and rights of under-18s in mind. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 35 would insert guidelines for guidance provided by the biometrics commissioner, including requirements for what information custody officers should provide. The biometrics commissioner is intended to be independent, and Alliance is of the belief that those directions could risk the independence of the commissioner. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 28 would remove the two-year retention period for penalty notices issued to adults. Alliance believes that the current provisions are appropriate, particularly as they include behaviour such as criminal damage.”
“of the Act's receiving Royal Assent. <BR /> <BR />Alliance will agree with the Minister and oppose the amendments in the group that have been tabled by Sinn Féin. I will raise a few particular points of concern about them, but the issue stems primarily from the fact that much of this will be resolved in regulations and updated PACE codes. Those will both receive more time and scrutiny than can be afforded today. <BR /> <BR />Amendment Nos 11, 12 and 13 relate to rewriting the biometric retention schedule for those under 18. Amendment No 11 would remove under-18s from the scope of the provisions on qualifying offences, which are some of the most serious crimes that a person can commit.”
“The amendment requires the delivery of draft regulations within five years, which feels suitable. Alliance will also support amendment No 104 from the Committee, which specifies that:”
“During Committee Stage, there was much discussion on whether photographs or images should be included as biometric material in the Bill. If there is one thing that all of us in the Chamber can agree on, it is that there is still much more that can be looked into in that space. <BR /> <BR />The use of technology to prevent crime and to evade detection is evolving. The heightened use or, at least, consideration of facial recognition technology is inevitable in years to come. The evidence that we received from local authorities and more widely across these islands, including from the Scottish Biometrics Commissioner, all pointed to that. Alliance believes that an enabling power strikes the right balance in ensuring that we can address the use of photographs in the future, once more specific policy development has occurred.”
“Alliance supports closing the gap in provision, as no power is provided in current legislation for the PSNI to require a person to attend a police station, including at a later stage, for a photograph to be taken, even when a photograph is considered unclear or incomplete. The provisions will allow not just for that but for the PSNI to direct officers to take fingerprints, DNA samples and photographs on a specific date and time. Those interventions will be useful in allowing the PSNI to maximise the time frames for the detection and prevention of crime. <BR /> <BR />I will move on to the amendments that the Committee for Justice has tabled, both of which will be supported by my party. Amendment No 40 would put in place a welcome enabling power regarding the retention, use and destruction of photographs.”
“That change will mitigate confusion over interpretations of the term "reported" in legislation and clarifies the timing of operational procedures across biometric provisions. <BR /> <BR />Alliance will also support amendment No 8, which provides further clarity on procedure across biometric provisions, highlighting the fact that the DNA and fingerprints of an individual who is arrested but not charged can be retained by the PSNI until the outcome of an application made to the biometrics commissioner is known. <BR /> <BR />Amendment Nos 66 and 67 will insert new clauses into the Bill, putting in place powers to photograph a person at a police station and the power to specify a date for a person's attendance at a police station.”
“I welcome the Department's recognition that more tweaks can be made to ensure that the legislation matches the reality of the Police and Criminal Evidence (Northern Ireland) Order 1989 (PACE) on the ground. We will also support amendment No 108 and others that make changes to schedule 2. Amendment No 108 updates the terminology in the PACE Order from:”
“I will start with the amendments standing in the Minister of Justice's name, all of which Alliance plans to support. <BR /> <BR />As other Members have recognised, Part 1 is an incredibly complex area of law. It is clear that the Minister and her officials have considered its components in detail. I will draw Members' attention to the content of some specific clauses and schedules. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 1 will amend clause 1 to allow the PSNI a more workable grace period of 28 days in which either to delete an individual's material that was held as part of an investigation or to apply to the biometrics commissioner for a continued retention period. Such practical changes are welcome and highlight the stress-testing that has taken place with the PSNI to ensure that the legislation will be as fit for purpose as possible.”
“I welcome the opportunity to make some comments at the Justice Bill's Consideration Stage. I joined the Committee for Justice in November 2024, shortly after the Bill's introduction. Following an 18-month Committee Stage, I am pleased that we are finally debating its content. <BR /> <BR />As we know, the Bill is incredibly varied and mixed in what it covers, tied together with the aim of building a more effective, efficient and modern justice system from which all across Northern Ireland can benefit. It follows judgements in the European Court of Human Rights, including S and Marper v the UK and Gaughran v the UK. Part 1 of the Bill clearly aims to put human rights at the centre by providing a balanced and proportionate framework for the retention and destruction of DNA and fingerprints for Northern Ireland.”
“Thank you, Minister. My understanding is that pharmacist representatives and GP federations both support alignment with Agenda for Change. Do you expect a decision to be made on pay parity?”
“Thank you, Minister. The issue is affecting people now. Homeowners are facing significant fees from some property management companies and cannot wait until the next mandate. Is there anything that you can do in the interim to support people who are facing significant rises in fees from property management companies?”
“Thank you, Minister. You mentioned that you had set aside £10 million for the small business rate relief scheme. However, the draft Budget has not been agreed by the Executive, as you know. If that Budget is not agreed, how will you ensure that that support can be delivered by the end of the mandate?”
“Junior Minister, my constituency of North Down has two areas in the Communities in Transition programme. What assessment has your Department made of the effectiveness of the programme in eradicating paramilitarism in the target areas?”
“Minister, have any of the community and voluntary sector organisations that provide support for victims and survivors of domestic violence been given confirmation of their funding for the rest of the financial year, which would ensure that they can continue to provide the invaluable support that people need?”
“It is noted, of course, that, to some extent, the UK Government have already accepted that by virtue of the new legislation that they are taking through. It is vital that the new Troubles Bill create a fully human rights-compliant process for legacy investigations that is capable of winning the trust and confidence of all victims and survivors. That is the only way to deliver the truth and justice that the families deserve. <BR /> <BR />Alliance has long argued that the Conservatives' proposed Troubles amnesty was an affront to victims and survivors, and that has been further validated. Moving forward, it has never been clearer that a successful approach to legacy will be centred on reconciliation, facilitating the pursuit of justice and information recovery in a fair, transparent and equal manner.”
“On behalf of the Alliance Party, I will put a few remarks on record regarding the Dillon judgement, which relates to the compatibility of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) with the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023. I am sure that all across the Chamber recognise that that continues to be an incredibly complex matter. It is important that all relevant stakeholders take time to consider the implications of the judgement fully. Alliance recognises that the successful appeal will be of great concern to many victims and survivors today, and my thoughts are first and foremost with them as we navigate the next steps. <BR /> <BR />The ICRIR is not fit for purpose. The case for a clean break is just as strong today as it was last week.”
“The Domestic Abuse and Civil Proceedings Act is incredibly important legislation, and it is positive to see so much focus on it. It is vital that we move forward and remain victim-led in order to tackle the barriers that they encounter. I look forward to working with Minister Long and her officials through the Justice Committee to ensure that all the provisions are enacted as quickly as possible in the most diligent manner.”
“Children are very much at the heart of these issues, and I have spoken to victims of abuse where, astonishingly, their fact-finding has established the perpetrator as a terrible and abusive partner, with minimal consequences, but a great and wonderful parent. How does that even make sense?”
“The Domestic Abuse and Civil Proceedings Act introduced a series of protections and interventions for victims of coercive control, including special measures that allow witnesses to give evidence through live links or from behind a screen. However, on the ground, it is clear that special measures have been much more normalised in criminal courts rather than civil, despite being available in family proceedings settings. The difference is not just in access and uptake alone but knowledge that it is an option in civil courts is much more minimal. More needs to be done to improve the victim's experience in court, including stopping cases from being prolonged for little reason and progressing regulations relating to the prohibition of cross-examination.”
“Just last week, the Criminal Justice Inspection published its third review of the Act. That attention is vital for keeping its progress on the agenda of key justice agencies, including the PSNI and the PPS. <BR /> <BR />In June 2025, the Lady Chief Justice released formal guidance on domestic abuse in family proceedings. It specifically references establishing when coercive control has happened in cases that are being seen in family courts. Whether there have been improvements for victims in the first year of its use will be very important to establish and, again, emphasises the need for cross-justice partner collaboration. <BR /> <BR />That being said, there can be what is felt like double standards between our criminal and civil courts.”
“<BR /> <BR />Through my work in my constituency office and more general work in family courts, I have spoken to many people who have suffered post-separation abuse, where the court is used as a vehicle for mental and financial torment. That key theme was identified in the 'Totally Invisible' report, which was published by the Commissioner Designate for Victims of Crime in December 2025. It examined the connection between domestic abuse and private family law proceedings. <BR /> <BR />The Domestic Abuse and Civil Proceedings Act was long needed. It looks specifically at special measures and support for victims of abuse during their justice journey. It has been incredibly worthwhile engaging in post-legislative scrutiny of the Act through the Justice Committee.”
“She noted it as a pattern or course of behaviour, with the intention of creating psychological and/or physical harm that gaslights and intimidates, creating long-lasting, traumatising impacts that are deeply felt by all victims involved, including any vulnerable children who, we hear, are disgustingly used as leverage in custody disputes. <BR /> <BR />For us to make any progress for victims of coercive control, our legislation, courts and support services must be fully equipped. The original motion brings in a particularly important point on coercive control, which is the use of it by perpetrators in court proceedings to re-traumatise their victims. In any context, it is extremely traumatic for victims to have to face the perpetrators.”
“Coercive control in personal relationships, whether they are romantic or not, is an incredibly serious matter, and I welcome the opportunity to speak about it in the Chamber this evening. Our society simply does not focus enough education and attention on that element of domestic violence. There is still so much to do to raise the profile of what coercive control actually is, as, often, victims can still be unaware of what they have experienced; they just know that something is wrong. <BR /> <BR />For that reason, I welcomed Minister Long making coercive control a legally recognised term in primary legislation during the previous mandate. That was long overdue.”
“Minister, I have also been contacted by constituents in North Down, and many of them have missed healthcare appointments at hospitals because of Royal Mail delays. Have you given any direction to the trusts that those people's appointments need to be prioritised urgently because it was not their fault that they did not receive the letter from Royal Mail?”
“I join others in paying tribute to Katie's family and loved ones, who have very much been in my thoughts. <BR /> <BR />Minister, you said that the review is about honouring Katie's memory by ensuring that all the ways in which she was so sadly failed cannot be repeated. That is hugely relevant for tackling violence against women and girls. Will you outline some of the wider work that will complement the implementation of the review's recommendations?”
“That is essential for the accountability of those who profit from the misery, suffering and, often, death of others across this region. <BR /> <BR />As the motion and the amendment both note, those who devastate lives need to face consequences. I and my Alliance colleagues welcome this conversation —”
“I agree with that. It is important that we get the legislation right and that it is effective. <BR /> <BR />Drug dealing is not a victimless crime, and consequences must be felt and must match public expectations. It is important that we keep pace with what those in law enforcement, including the PSNI and our judiciary, need to make that happen. On that point, I welcome the fact that the Consideration Stage of Minister Long's Justice Bill will include two additional amendments that are focused on tackling organised crime. If those proposals are accepted by the Assembly, they will create specific, bespoke offences relating to participating in and directing the criminal activities of an organised crime group.”
“In that spirit, I welcome the Department of Justice having put on public record its commitment to taking forward Jasmin's mum Pauline's proposals in the scope of the ongoing sentencing review, so that those can be included in the Department's policy development and put out to public consultation.”
“We all know of Pauline's work to update Northern Ireland's approach to the enforcement of drug-related legislation, but also the need to maintain the dignity of those who are receiving treatment. To channel such personal loss into a very public quest for change is not easy, and Pauline has done that with absolute grace and dignity. <BR /> <BR />It is, of course, of note that drugs misuse policy is reserved to our counterparts at Westminster under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, but that does not mean that we should shy away from making our own positions clear as an Assembly.”
“There is no way that we can bring back a loved one who has died following drug consumption, but we can ensure that those who made it happen are brought to justice, especially when they are so often tied to organised crime and paramilitary-related activity. For that to happen, we need to have a robust and accountable framework for how we deal with drug-related offences, especially when dealing has resulted in the death or serious injury of another person. <BR /> <BR />I commend the immense bravery of Pauline Duddy, who lost her daughter Jasmin. That has really catapulted the public conversation about how we should be bringing accountability for those who profit from the sale of drugs.”
“Substance misuse can cause undeniable harm for individuals, their loved ones and our communities. As the motion notes, there has been a 47% increase in the number of drug-related deaths registered in Northern Ireland in the past decade alone. Delving further into that data, we can see that it is about access to not just one singular drug for any one person, but access to multiple drugs. Almost three quarters of drug deaths in 2003 involved two or more substances. Those who are struggling with addiction are deserving of respect, empathy and therapeutic support. <BR /> <BR />The motion recognises that the hold that drug misuse has on vulnerable individuals is terrifying. However, those who are dealing drugs and are responsible for facilitating and supporting such a damaging intake of illegal substances need to face consequences.”
“Minister, you have delivered a huge amount of change and legislation to tackle violence against women and girls. What more needs to be done to make that change in our society?”
“Thank you, deputy First Minister. What you said about collaborating and linking across Departments on the prevention of hate crime is important. When it comes to preventative work on tackling hate crime, are you concerned about the removal of front-line youth work services?”
“He said that he wanted to return to the Masters and win in order to show that last year was not a fluke, and that is exactly what he did. We are all immensely proud of Rory. He is an incredible ambassador for Northern Ireland and shows our young people that, if they dream big, work hard and persevere, they can achieve anything. Congratulations, Rory.”