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 5624940

Read the official Assembly record

Text

It is the silo approach to our government. It is the fact that the Departments are not working together. That is the failure. That is where progress has not happened. I appreciate what the Minister said about a trauma-informed approach. Prior to her being announced as Justice Minister, I met with her permanent secretary and ensured that, had I been given the role, we would have put together a trauma-informed approach. I recognise and commend the work that goes on in the Department of Justice, and I commend communities for doing that work too. The biggest problem for me is that the people who would make the decisions and drive forward and fully implement the change are not on board. They are not. Otherwise, the Minister would have introduced the measure in her Bill, it would have been signed off by her Executive colleagues, and we would not be debating it as a Back-Bench amendment to a Justice Bill. That is what worries me. l will recommend something to the Minister, because we are where we are with the petition of concern. I would really like to see a review of why children commit crime, one that looks at all the things that she has talked about, building on the Ray Jones review, but also looks at what Health is not doing and what Communities is not doing.

Yes, go ahead.

Thousands.

Minister, with respect, how many recommendations from those reports have been implemented?

Does that include reducing the minimum age of criminal responsibility? If that is the case, why is this a Back-Bench amendment to a Justice Bill?

By all means pursue that, but you are asking me to vote on a policy change that requires that input and commitment. Sadly, I do not see it.

Go ahead.

I agree with that, but, unfortunately, when Ministers do not support a proposal and there is not collective responsibility at the Executive table, that is what it ends up being. Maybe that is a criticism of our Government and how issues are taken forward. The point that I am trying to make is that I do not disagree with the principle of what we are trying to do. This should be about recognising why children commit crime. I get your point about reports and all of that, but what has followed? The amendment is not the result of a recommendation that has been fulfilled from an Executive report; it is a Back-Bench amendment to the Justice Bill. Over recent days, people have said that we need to have this conversation more widely in the public domain. That is fair. Quite frankly, most people are only hearing about this because of the debate today. I commend the proponents of the amendment for doing it, because we are finally having the conversation. Sadly, the reality is that we still will not go anywhere with it. I recommend that the Minister takes forward something on her own initiative and calls the bluff of those who say that this is something that we need by saying, "OK, Executive colleagues. If this isn't fully worked out from an Executive perspective, let's do it with a cross-departmental approach". If you are not going to do that, where do we move next?

Yes.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:57 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