Debate contribution: Justice Bill: Consideration Stage

Debate contribution by Ms Claire Sugden on 16 June 2026.

MLA

Ms Claire Sugden

Party at the time

Independent

Date

16 June 2026

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Executive Committee Business

Heading

Justice Bill: Consideration Stage

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5624879

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I am sure that you are all delighted to see me stand to give my contribution — well, we will see. Thank you, Mr Speaker. I hope to give a different perspective from that of other Members. I am not able to support any of the amendments, and, in my contribution, I will explain why. If children as young as 10 are coming into contact with the criminal justice system, we have a serious problem, and that should concern all of us. It should force us to ask difficult questions about what has happened in that child's life long before they ever reached that point, and I appreciate that other Members acknowledged that in their contributions. Most of us instinctively recognise that children are different from adults. They are still developing emotionally, psychologically and socially. They are susceptible to trauma, adverse childhood experiences and negative influences. Sadly, many children today, not least in Northern Ireland, are exposed to more of those influences than previous generations were. They are less able to assess risk, understand consequences and regulate their behaviour. For that reason, I believe that a legitimate conversation needs to be had about whether the current minimum age of criminal responsibility remains appropriate. Indeed, that is not a new conversation. It crossed my desk 10 years ago, when I was Minister of Justice. It was a difficult issue then, and it remains a difficult issue now, with little movement in those 10 years. I do not dismiss the arguments that have been made for change. Indeed, there is much in those arguments that I agree with in theory. While I agree with the argument for change, in principle, I remain unconvinced that we have done the work that is necessary to make that change be successful in practice.

Too often, the justice system is asked to deal with children whose difficulties began long before they ever came in contact with the police or even became known to social services, because many of them have experienced trauma, neglect, family breakdown, mental health difficulties, educational disadvantage, involvement with criminal influences or coercive control by paramilitary organisations. Many have been manipulated. Many are being exploited. By the time that they enter the justice system, multiple opportunities for intervention will have been missed. In truth, it is not a Department of Justice issue; it is a Department of Health issue, a Department of Education issue and a Department for Communities issue as well. It becomes an issue for the Department of Justice only after all the other systems fail. It is the cost of failure in our society. If we are serious about reducing offending among children, we need to understand why children offend in the first place. We need evidence, interventions and properly funded support services, and we need to identify vulnerability earlier and respond to it more effectively. One of my concerns about the debate, which has been stalled for many years, is that those who support change are seeking to use the Justice Bill as the vehicle to move the conversation forward, and I understand why. There is a belief that, if the law changes now, the support systems to enable the change will follow and a belief that the amendment may be the only available opportunity to make progress at this time. I am sympathetic to that, because progress has not been made by the Executive or through a private Member's Bill. My difficulty is that I do not share that confidence that the support systems will follow, because, throughout the mandate, we have repeatedly heard Ministers, Departments and public bodies explain that existing statutory responsibilities cannot be fully delivered because funding is unavailable or resources are stretched beyond capacity. Against that backdrop, I struggle to understand why we should assume that creating new obligations will automatically produce the services that are currently missing.

Yes, Minister.

646 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:56 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification