Nuala McAllister
North Belfast · Alliance Party · Northern Ireland
“I have submitted quite a number of questions for written answer on autism services, and the answers, sometimes on the same day from the Department, contradict themselves. The Minister often refers to the emotional health and well-being framework as the idea that will frame all of the uniform services.”
“Absolutely. Everyone is taking my speech; I was going to say that. Of course, it is complex and subjective to the individual person. If we are truly talking about keeping an individual safe and other prisoners safe, we would not do what the amendment proposes; we would carry on in the way that the system already operates, using a risk-bas…”
“I thank the Member for his question. The Assembly Commission is progressing a programme of remedial works to address defects identified in the roof of Parliament Buildings and to protect the long-term integrity of this grade A listed building. The works have been structured in two phases.”
“More often than not, we have conversations in the Chamber or in public about trans women, but that would place a trans man who has been convicted of a violent crime against a woman in a prison with women. It does not make sense, and it is not coming from the perspective of safety; it is coming from ideology.”
“In providing catering services throughout Parliament Buildings, the Assembly Commission strives to meet the differing demands of the special dietary needs of our wide customer base.”
“I support amendment No 96 and oppose amendment No 97. I do not plan to speak to amendment No 96, as there were a number of interventions last night, and I will leave many of the remarks to my party colleague the Minister of Justice. <BR /> <BR />We oppose Timothy Gaston's amendment.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,216 lines we hold for Nuala McAllister, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 25.
“I thank the Minister for her intervention and for clarifying that what I was talking about has already happened: it did not go through. Do we honestly believe that the DUP would have a sudden change of heart? We know that the DUP does not support raising the minimum age. <BR /> <BR />I will now mention a number of the organisations that have been in contact with me not only this year but over the years and that have been working on the issue for decades. There were many comments from across the Chamber, most of which came from MLAs to my right, suggesting that we were dangerous legislators; that we did not know what we were talking about; that the proposal was simply wrong and that it was from the United Nations; and that, because we did not know what the framework would look like, we could not possibly implement it now.”
“It is the work of social workers, and degrading their profession is not becoming of an MLA. <BR /> <BR />To the Members who say that they are willing to look at a youth justice Bill in the next mandate — UUP Members in particular; I note that only one of its Members, albeit one who did not sign the petition of concern, is here — I say that we need a reality check. Does the Ulster Unionist Party believe that a proposal to raise the age of criminal responsibility will get through an Executive, given how they currently operate, and that we could trust the DUP to put it on the agenda, never mind agree it as part of a Bill?”
“<BR /> <BR />All those issues are important and will establish part of the framework when the minimum age of criminal responsibility is raised, but we need to remember that we are discussing children and young people. Whilst a child may not be able to be arrested, they can be detained if the issue is serious — even if it is not — and there will be interventions. I will reflect on comments that were made about social work being the action of "beanbag" chats. That is a degrading comment to make about an entire profession. If the Member who made the comments had any idea of what, in reality, life is like for the people who interface with those minors on a daily basis — not the police but people who are on the ground and in schools every day — he would not call it "beanbag" work.”
“We use the knowledge, information and evidence and can apply that here. We do not have to go far across the world, however. We can look to Scotland, which introduced the model of a children's hearing, under which a child is brought before such a hearing when harm is committed that is not a criminal offence — when someone is under the age of criminal responsibility. We also need to look at countries around the world that have a social justice system. There are many such countries — Denmark, Germany, Norway, Greece — where much research has been done into social justice system interventions. In some of that research, it was said that social methods of intervention were, at times, harsher than those in a criminal justice system.”
“I thank the Member for her intervention. It is important to acknowledge that many organisations, such as Woman's Aid and Victim Support, have said that the minimum age needs to be raised. <BR /> <BR />We have heard DUP and UUP Members argue and comment that we are unable to tell them what the system would look like. I ask them to listen. The fact that we have not answered the question in a way in which they wanted or liked does not mean that the question has not been answered. It does not mean that the work is finished either. The Justice Minister has already stated that the amendment would not be commenced until the framework was in place. <BR /> <BR />In the Chamber and in Committee, we often talk about learning from best practice in other jurisdictions around the world.”
“If Members care about tackling sexual crime and the crisis that we face with ending violence against women and girls, they would not trivialise such a serious issue.”
“First and foremost, Members cannot make something up and claim it to be fact. Every Member is entitled to their opinion. Members are also entitled to use facts that suit their agenda, but it is important that those facts be grounded in evidence. Every MLA who does not engage with the evidence and with stakeholders needs to take a long, hard look at the job that they are doing. <BR /> <BR />I will talk about some of the most disparaging and misinformed comments made in the Chamber yesterday about legalising rape. The very fact that that issue was trivialised not only does a disservice to victims but completely ignores the reality of whom the perpetrators of rape and sexual violence are. It is also an insult to the public's intelligence to say that any MLA is supporting the legalisation of rape.”
“Why, then, do a minority in the Chamber believe that those countries have got it wrong? Raising the minimum age is about protecting young people from exploitation and ensuring that they get the necessary intervention at a young age, which, ultimately, reduces their risk of reoffending, rather than about throwing kids into the criminal justice system when it is then so difficult to escape it. What does less reoffending mean? It means reduced crime and fewer victims. It is about giving kids a chance in life. It is about protecting the entire community that we represent. It is not about using hyperbole, misleading statements or misinformation to scaremonger. <BR /> <BR />I will touch on some of the completely inaccurate comments made in the Chamber yesterday on the issue.”
“You know what? I will not, because you have said enough, and it is important that we get on with the debate. <BR /> <BR />It does not take just one person to get the issue right. I deal with young people. I speak to social workers who are concerned about the future of the children in their care. I deal with family members as well, and I also talk to victims. It is not just about me and what I have experienced as an MLA, however. I am certainly not in the business of making it all about me or being a one-man show. Instead, I engage with experts, stakeholders, children and young people, teachers, social workers and the police: the list goes on. <BR /> <BR />I will move on to the crux of the issue, which is why so many countries have already raised the minimum age of criminal responsibility (MACR).”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. That was the end of it. I was just going to say that I do not understand what the UUP is doing, because I do not even know which section of the party to speak to about it. The mere suggestion, however, that any Member believes that they are the only MLA who understands the issue that we are talking about is the height of ignorance. We heard that time and again during yesterday's debate.”
“Any time that we get close to change or even moderate progress, MLAs abuse the system when they have a different opinion. <BR /> <BR />Alliance has always called for reform. The Good Friday Agreement is not cemented in stone. We all know why the DUP relies on the petition of concern: it is about control and losing that control. Over the past number of years, the unionist vote has been splintering —.”
“I stand here to put forth my arguments in support of an evidence-based, empathetic and child-centred proposal. However, Members have ensured that Northern Ireland will yet again be left behind through their use of the petition of concern. <BR /> <BR />The petition of concern was created to protect minority rights as a safeguard for communities in Northern Ireland. We should not be surprised that it has been abused. To those who say that they use it legitimately, I say this: just because something exists does not mean that it is right. Frankly, I am disgusted by much of the misinformation that is being peddled by those who are not even confident enough in their arguments to put them to a democratic vote in the Chamber. That is an example of why people in Northern Ireland are frustrated with politics.”
“I had contemplated withdrawing my name from the speaking list for today's debate because of the petition of concern and the fact that any point that we make in the Chamber is, essentially, moot, given the number of Members who have signed the petition of concern. However, I still think that it is important that we continue with the debate today. In particular, for me, as an Alliance MLA, it is deeply frustrating that my vote will now not count in the vote that will take place following the 14 days. It is important to say that, while the DUP Members and some UUP Members can take away my vote, they will certainly not take away my voice. <BR /> <BR />The evidence is clear: criminalising children does not work. It criminalises vulnerability, entrenches inequality and fails children, victims and communities.”
“I am intervening on this point, because you said that you had been involved in policing and the criminal justice system for over 20 years. Evidence is taken from a victim. You are saying that no evidence can be taken or collected. Evidence is taken from a victim. You will recall from your policing days that crimes can be investigated even where no charge is put to a suspect, because that is what happens. <BR /> <BR />Do you know what? Facts do matter. You know fine rightly that evidence can be collected from victims. You know that there does not even have to be a charge put for anyone to be referred to Victim Support or social services or for there to be safeguarding put in place or a curfew or interventions when it comes to social services. It is important to remember that facts matter in all of this.”
“On your first point about pleading to a lesser charge, you cannot plead to a lesser charge if the offence does not exist. Therefore, it is the Public Prosecution Service that is pushing the charges against that individual — the charges listed under the amendments — so that young person cannot plead to a lesser charge because it does not exist. I do not understand what you do not understand. It is the charges that are there that the Public Prosecution Service is putting forward, and it is those charges that will stand. There is no option to plead to a lesser charge if the offence does not exist.”
“While you keep talking about frameworks and protocols, it will not be about just one; it will be about ensuring that you can work with all the agencies. I will touch on some of them when I make my speech. Some of them already exist and are successful in keeping children out of the criminal justice system.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I was going to make a point on something that the Minister touched on, but I will point out that some of those protocols to keep young people out of the criminal justice system already exist between the police and social services.”
“I highlight to the Member the fact that, in my constituency, one in 20 children is in the care of social services. Being under the care of social services does not necessarily mean that they have been removed from their parents. A lot of the children whom you referenced are already under the radar of social services and have committed crimes. It is not as though we would be handing over the work to social services. Even if the amendment is not passed today or tomorrow, social services should already be involved, and if they are not, that is something that the Department of Health should answer for, regardless of what happens here today.”
“I thank the Member for taking an intervention. I do not know whether he has read the Ray Jones review, in which he touches on a lot of the issues associated with juvenile justice. Almost 50% of the young people who have been in the juvenile justice centre (JJC) or who have committed different criminal offences that have not resulted in being held in the JJC are kids in care. In the review, Professor Jones stipulated what the framework could look like and said that it should involve not just an arm's-length body but the Justice and Health Departments working a lot together. The juvenile justice centre is already doing a lot of work well, but that could be done in the health sector and by social services. It does not need to go through that process.”
“I urge all parents to reconsider when it comes to buying such vehicles, because their children may end up in harm's way, not through their fault but by accident. <BR /> <BR />The Assembly can take action. I welcome amendment No 90. I put my name to it and I thank the Member again for tabling it, but it is not the only action that we can take. I hope that we have cross-party support to pass it today.”
“The Department of Justice will help in any way that it can, but, ultimately, it is for the Department for Infrastructure to lead on it. I hope that, after today, that is recognised and pushed forward. <BR /> <BR />In the meantime, while we push for amendment No 90 to be agreed, it is worth using the opportunity to call not just on young people but on their parents. It is the parents or guardians who buy e-scooters at hundreds of pounds. It is not the young people. Some e-scooters cost thousands of pounds. It is up to the parents who make an active decision to buy those vehicles for their children to use. That is the reality. That is not saying that they are bad parents. It is saying that parents need to reflect on their decision and ask themselves, "Is that safe?", and, "How is my child using it?".”
“There are designated lanes that e-scooters can be ridden on, albeit our active travel infrastructure is severely lacking in Northern Ireland. Also, the speed in miles per hour that they can go at is worth another discussion here in the Assembly Chamber. The Department for Infrastructure needs to step up to the plate to ensure that there is regulation for the speed limit. We cannot go for years without having regulations, otherwise we will see more and more injuries. <BR /> <BR />It is not just about having a policing response. Too often, dangerous issues in Northern Ireland are·left to the police to deal with. We need to ensure that there is a cross-departmental approach. From correspondence and responses to questions, I know that the Minister of Justice agrees and has urged the Department for Infrastructure to work on the issue.”
“We have won that argument. We recognise that, as does everyone in the public. I do not doubt that every constituency office has heard from a member of the public who wants this to be dealt with. <BR /> <BR />We also need to look at the approach that is taken in Ireland around further regulation. Whilst the amendment that we are speaking about today is about the seizure of those vehicles, nobody in the Chamber is pretending that that will be the panacea for dealing with e-scooters and scramblers. Nobody is standing up and saying that. It should be on the record that we know that there should be greater regulation. Whether that regulation looks similar to that in the Republic of Ireland is for discussion. The Republic of Ireland has an age limit.”
“The current law means that they are for off-road use. They are supposed to be used in places or on land that is designated for those types of vehicles, because they require a licence and insurance. Some safety regulations apply, but they are not just being used in that way. <BR /> <BR />It is not just about ensuring that e-scooters and scramblers can be seized; it is about drawing greater public attention and awareness to the issue. As the 'Belfast Telegraph' reported — I think that it came from an FOI request — it was acknowledged that there have been 200 casualties, 51 serious injuries and three deaths in Northern Ireland from 2021-25 because of e-scooters and scramblers. Quite frankly, I think that that is too high. Ms Ferguson spoke about the increase in injuries that an emergency department consultant said that he had seen.”
“They do not want to use their bikes any more, because they feel that those vehicles are a more fun way to get around, but that is not just what it is any more. When you see either e-scooters or scramblers, they will primarily be with young people. I do not say that to stigmatise young people either, because, let us face it, they are not buying the e-scooters, but I will go on to that in a moment. It is mostly young people who we see cutting across junctions without wearing helmets, paying no regard to stop signs, green lights or red lights, and going in front of traffic and often up on to footpaths. We had an incident in west Belfast a couple of weeks ago. It was really sad to see a very young child being injured. It was so lucky that he did not lose his life. His mum has also spoken up about the dangers of e-scooters.”
“We see photos on social media every week that police put out across Northern Ireland. In my district, in Belfast, and particularly in North Belfast, we often see the police put up photos of the scramblers and e-scooters that they have seized. A lot of the seizures are based primarily on not having insurance; the police use that power as well. It is, however, also important to reflect that there is a power and that there will be a greater power to remove them when they are driven dangerously. <BR /> <BR />The aim is to give greater strength and flexibility to the police to deal with the issue. It is not new, but it is certainly growing on the streets in Northern Ireland. I understand as well as anyone in the Chamber that e-scooters and scramblers are enticing, particularly for young people, who are full of adventure. They want to use them.”
“Again, I am not sure whether I need to, but I declare that I am a member of the Policing Board and have asked questions relating to the issues in the amendments that we are speaking to this evening. <BR /> <BR />Most of my remarks will be on amendment No 90, which I was happy to put my name to. I thank the Member from the SDLP for agreeing to that. It is important that we work together as elected representatives to push forward and change the law to give the police powers, where necessary, to make our streets safer. We hope that this mechanism will remove the need for police officers to give a warning before seizing e-scooters and scramblers that are used in any manner "causing alarm, distress or annoyance". It is important to reflect that, currently, the police have the power to remove.”
“The Member highlighted an important point about misconduct not being a crime. I respect the fact that he was talking about legacy cases, but we have to be careful, as there will be instances in which crimes and misconduct have both been committed. Both those issues must be looked at. It is important to highlight the fact that there could be instances in which there is also crime, and we cannot wait in those cases. As the Member well knows, the threshold for criminal conduct will be higher, whereas the threshold for professional misconduct at a hearing is lower. They should be brought not on a par with each other but at a level where it is not necessary to wait until the criminal case is over. It is important that I highlight that to the Member. I know that he was talking about legacy, but it is a really important issue.”
“We all know the background of the current chief executive, but he is doing an excellent job. Given that it is the IOPC in England and Wales, if it is not to be the Office of the Police Ombudsman, it is important to ask who it should be, because it needs to be done. The gap needs to be closed.”
“The Minister has outlined the regulations and mentioned looking at the specified time frames in them. It is important that we work together. The regulations will be forthcoming to the Justice Committee and then to the Assembly. <BR /> <BR />It is important to note that, in England and Wales, it is the responsibility of the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC). Who should make the recommendation instead of the ombudsman? There is no other body. I appreciate that the Member is well within his rights to say that he does not have faith in the ombudsman's office, but who else will do it? The current chief executive of the ombudsman's office is doing an excellent job, specifically on previous misconduct cases concerning abuse of position for sexual purposes.”
“The amendments would enhance the confidence of the public in the PSNI. In the end, it is not just about officers. It is about the 14-year-old who was abused by an officer. It is about Katie Simpson, who was failed by so many officers. It is about every victim who has long waited for the truth. It is about the officers who carry out their duties and are ashamed of those who do so in bad faith.”
“They have victims at their heart, and the PSNI wants to be a service that has the confidence of all victims and the confidence of all of Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />This group of amendments is one reform in two halves. The Minister's amendments would make sure that an officer cannot escape by leaving; mine would make sure that an officer cannot evade accountability by waiting. Together, they say something simple and overdue, which is that officers and constables who carry out the role of an officer on the ground, those of senior rank or those in leadership deserve to be held to account like every officer in England and Wales. They also deserve to be able to carry out that role with scrutiny in order to have the respect and confidence of the public.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is important that we commence the powers as soon as is practicable but in the right way so that the regulations are right and are made in conjunction with not just the Department of Justice but all the authorities that can use them. I give the Minister my support in looking at further regulations. I also say to the Minister that, if the amendments in my name require additional work, I am content to work with the Department of Justice, because I want to get it right so that we do not have to come back to the Chamber in the next mandate or beyond to fix them. <BR /> <BR />I say to any Member who worries that faster discipline means rougher justice that the opposite is true. Everything in the amendments is designed following reflection on other mechanisms in England and Wales and within the PSNI.”
“If it was an investigation that was initiated in the PSNI, it has that fast-track power, so there is a massive gap there in PONI not having that power. A member of the public or perhaps a victim refers a case to the Police Ombudsman; yet that victim has to wait five or six years. That is not acceptable. If it was an investigation within the Police Service, it can fast-track it to a misconduct hearing. <BR /> <BR />My amendments are not about a stick with which to beat the PSNI. As I have said, the overwhelming majority of PSNI officers act in good faith and carry out their duties appropriately. For those who do not, however, accountability mechanisms must be available.”
“That happens: officers have been suspended for five years on full pay awaiting criminal outcomes so that they can be dealt with in misconduct proceedings. Why should the public purse pay for that five-year suspension when the matter could be dealt with through the fast-track process? <BR /> <BR />I have not come to this on my own. The amendments are in my name, but we have worked on the issue on the Policing Board, and the Criminal Justice Inspection has said that that power needs to be within PONI as it is within the PSNI. It is also one of the 23 recommendations in the ombudsman's statutory five-year review, and the Police Service has said that it would support it. The Police Service said that it would support it because it has that power.”
“We often see cases in the Office of the Police Ombudsman — I refer again to the Katie Simpson case — that involve multiple officers, expand over a few months and take years to comply. There are many such cases that involve many officers, the majority of whom will not have any misconduct charges and will not have behaved inappropriately, but there have been cases that were large in volume, with more than one officer, but where incontrovertible evidence was found against one officer in particular. That is evidence that simply cannot be disputed. It is in writing, in body-worn footage or on other video camera footage: it is evidence that cannot be disputed. Why, therefore, should we have to wait years with that officer suspended on full pay?”
“That officer was able to face an accelerated misconduct hearing. He had resigned, but he was able to be barred and added to the barred list. Therefore, it is a tool that has had effective operation and use in England and Wales. <BR /> <BR />I move now to the amendments in my name — amendment Nos 76 and 77. What do the amendments do? They would allow the Police Ombudsman to send a fast-track report to the appropriate authority before investigation is fully complete, even when criminal proceedings on the same matter are ongoing, with insight and clarification from the Public Prosecution Service (PPS) that it would not prejudice criminal proceedings, which is important. <BR /> <BR />I want to provide a bit of context on that.”
“Of course, there is condition C, where the issues are so serious that the Police Ombudsman must take into account the three criteria that are laid down. It is important to acknowledge the 12-month period in England and Wales. Working with the Department of Justice and, no doubt, the Committee, we will ensure what the regulations will look like moving forward. Currently, officers remain free to leave. In England and Wales, the legislation and proceedings that allow the barred list, the advisory list and the misconduct proceedings do not prevent an officer from retiring or resigning. It is important to highlight that. <BR /> <BR />Following the legislation in England and Wales, one case in particular came to light. An officer in Cheshire was investigated for abuse of position for sexual purposes.”
“Of course, we have asked the police numerous times at the Policing Board whether they would support the amendments put forward by the Justice Minister and those in my name, and they support them, because they want a police service that has the support and confidence of the public. That is important. <BR /> <BR />Before I go on to my amendments, I will recap on the mechanics of how it works in England and Wales and the precedent that that sets for Northern Ireland. Condition A, which we spoke about, is when a person leaves after an allegation comes to the appropriate authorities. That is one mechanism to deal with that. Condition B is when a person leaves before the allegation surfaces. The period will be specified in regulations, and the Minister has clarified that today.”
“For those of you who do not sit on the Policing Board, RORIC was established following the likes of the Angiolini inquiry to look at historical investigations. It related to 134 officers from 2012 to 2022. The initial investigation of those officers meant that there was a delay in allegations reaching a disciplinary hearing before officers resigned or retired. It was right that there was a review in the PSNI of those cases. Given what has hit the media in the past six or nine months about the current case that is sitting with the Police Ombudsman, it is even more pertinent that that issue is dealt with and that the gap on accountability is closed.”
“What if they had left the police just upon the publication of that review? I am not saying that that is the case, but we have to deal with all the circumstances that could arise. <BR /> <BR />Currently, there is no criminal offence of abuse of position for sexual purposes, and the threshold for misconduct in public office is high. We are not seeking to change that today; that would require consultation. However, it is important that, where there is a mechanism to hold officers to account, that is established. I understand that there are six officers awaiting proceedings and that others were dismissed or convicted on other criminal grounds during the review period. <BR /> <BR />The Angiolini inquiry, the Langdale report and Operation RORIC have been mentioned.”
“That is where a lot of the cases come up, if an officer has already retired or resigned or perhaps has retired or resigned during misconduct proceedings and subsequently cannot be added to any advisory or barred list, should one exist. That is a gap that we are trying to close, but it is important to touch on the issue of serious misconduct. <BR /> <BR />One particular issue is the abuse of position for sexual purposes. Everyone in the Chamber will agree that that is serious. The ombudsman published a review earlier this year with cases from 2018 to 2024. Since that review was published, 20 more cases have come forward, with the youngest victim being 14 years old. That is serious misconduct. What if those officers had left the police in just the last few years — in the last eight or 12 months?”
“I thank the Member for his remarks. I agree. I hope that, with that clarification, we will get the DUP on board and it will support the Minister's amendments as well. <BR /> <BR />As I was finishing up before the break, I was going to touch on the issue of serious misconduct.”
“Thank you, Minister. As I said in my remarks, further regulations will come forward on this issue. It will not be finished in its entirety in primary legislation. We look forward to those regulations.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I was at that Business Committee meeting, but I do not recall telling myself to be as succinct as possible, so, if you do not mind, I will stick to my speech. <BR /> <BR />I was bringing my remarks to a close on amendment Nos 68, 69 and 127 from the Justice Minister.”
“I will give way to Mr Burrows, and then I will give way to you, Minister.”
“In a wee second, because I want to go on. <BR /> <BR />One of the issues that I am raising here is the seriousness of the alleged misconduct and the public interest. We should not use anything to undermine public interest and serious misconduct. Any officer who would have been dismissed for serious misconduct had they been a serving officer should be dealt with. <BR /> <BR />When it comes to legacy, we already have institutions and the PSNI, which is under overwhelming stress and has a heavy workload, dealing with those cases. Of course, we already have PONI cases on legacy. However, the amendment arose from what the Policing Board and the police themselves recommended to close the gap on current accountability.”
“I thank the Minister for her intervention.”
“I am happy to give way to the Minister if she wants to come in.”
“Also to be taken into account is the fact that the regulations further up in the conditions that are set out will have a time limit. I appreciate that that is not in the Bill, but it will be set out in regulations that will mirror those in England and Wales. The Justice Minister has committed to that today.”