Debate contribution: Standing Order 27A: Voting by Proxy
Debate contribution by Ms Kellie Armstrong on .
- MLA
- Ms Kellie Armstrong
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 22 October 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Committee Business
- Heading
- Standing Order 27A: Voting by Proxy
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4608198
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. As Chairperson of the Committee on Procedures, I am delighted to bring to the Assembly during Parenting Week a new procedure to allow for proxy voting for MLAs in certain circumstances. As all of us know, an MLA's role has a number of facets. We have our parliamentarian role in the Assembly, our constituency role and our party roles. As MLAs are not employees, we do not have terms and conditions that would support Members who have become parents. When an MLA is absent from a plenary sitting due to maternity, paternity or similar leave, there is no procedure to ensure that their democratic role in the House can be fulfilled. The new procedure will allow MLAs to vote in the House by proxy. Let me give some background. When the Procedures Committee was first established a few months ago, we were faced with a large number of topics that needed attention. The Committee was unanimous in deciding that we would make proxy voting in plenary sittings for MLAs on parental leave our top priority. We initially considered a range of possible categories for proxy voting, including parental leave, long-term illness, bereavement and absence on official Assembly business and whether it should be extended to Committees as well as for plenary business. However, the Committee expressed concerns that, with the exception of proxy voting for parental leave in plenary sittings, the other categories of proxy voting in plenary and in Committees would require a level of deliberation and assessment of implications that would require a long-term piece of work. On the other hand, proxy voting for parental leave is a well-established practice in many other legislatures and has fewer operational issues. We knew that, if we did our research and spent some time considering the issues in depth, it could be introduced to the Assembly with a degree of assurance that the associated implications were well known and had been explored in the Assembly context. It is worth emphasising that foremost in our considerations was ensuring that proxy voting could be introduced without undermining or damaging the integrity of our voting system. The Committee has taken a two-part approach, with the first part providing the key principles for proxy voting in the Standing Order that is before you today. The second part of our approach is to ask the Speaker to provide guidance on how the proxy voting scheme will operate on a practical and administrative level. Those are the day-to-day things, such as how to make a notification, what the deadline is etc, and other matters that do not need to be in a Standing Order but that Members need to know to make the scheme work. The Committee discussed those practical matters in some detail, and our thoughts and suggestions are contained in the Committee report. We anticipate that our deliberations on them will be helpful to the Speaker in producing the guidance. I will cover some of them in my speech today but, as it is the Standing Order that the Assembly will vote on, I will concentrate on explaining that. A copy of the draft Standing Order is on page 25 of the Committee report, which was issued to all MLAs on 15 October by email. In the Standing Order, paragraph (1) sets out the eligibility criteria for proxy voting. It requires that the Member who wishes to designate a proxy has to satisfy one of the conditions set out in paragraph (2). Paragraph (1)(b) also requires the Speaker to have issued guidance or, as it is referenced in the Standing Order, "the Scheme". Moving on to paragraph (1)(c), in the Assembly, the Speaker does not vote on any plenary business, and the Principal Deputy Speaker and Deputy Speakers do not participate in the debate, including voting, on any item of business for which they have occupied the Chair. With that in mind and to ensure that we maintain that essential element of our voting system, paragraph (1)(c) provides that the Speaker and Deputy Speakers cannot act as proxy for another Member. For the avoidance of doubt, let me be clear that the provision also covers the Principal Deputy Speaker. There is no reference to the Principal Deputy Speaker in the Standing Order as it is not in law a discrete office. The Principal Deputy Speaker is necessarily also a Deputy Speaker. Paragraph (1)(d) requires the Member and their proxy to have complied with the guidance. Paragraph (2) sets out the principal conditions for eligibility for the scheme. Paragraph (2)(a) is intended to make it clear that Members, while not entitled to various statutory leave for the variety of parental leave, as noted in the Standing Order, may apply for a proxy vote in circumstances where an employee would have the right to such leave. In other words, if a Member takes maternity leave, paternity leave, adoption leave, shared parental leave or parental bereavement leave, they will be entitled to apply for a proxy vote. It is worth noting that the Committee has been clear that the scheme is not available to Members who are looking after a sick child or need to accompany a child to an appointment. Proving a proxy vote for that type of parental leave may be addressed in the future, but, for now, it is not included in Standing Orders. The categories in paragraph (2)(b) are not currently statutory rights but are included in recognition of their impact on the individual and because similar circumstances are covered in other legislatures. Paragraph (2)(c) provides for parental leave for fostering responsibilities. There is no legal concept of fostering leave, and we in the Assembly will be first to include it as a category of parental leave. As there is no legal concept of fostering leave and as fostering covers many variations, the Committee on Procedures has been more definitive in our report on what we mean by "fostering". I will cover the fostering aspects in more detail later. Paragraph (3) sets out the matters that must be included in the scheme and guidance to be issued by the Speaker. They are the processes by which a Member may designate a proxy, the period for which a proxy may be exercised, how a proxy can be varied or withdrawn and how a proxy vote can be exercised. Paragraph (4)(a) sets it out that the proxy voting scheme may be used only in plenary sessions of the Assembly: it does not cover Committees. I have already explained that we felt that it would take considerable work to explore the implications of proxy voting in Committee. Paragraph (4) also provides that a proxy vote cannot count towards quorum in plenary and that a proxy vote must be recorded in the Official Report and the Minutes of Proceedings. The latter provision is to ensure full transparency for other MLAs and the public. Paragraph (4)(d) sets out certain matters on which a proxy vote may not be exercised, which were included after much discussion and consideration of legal advice. Paragraph (4)(d) prevents a proxy vote being used on matters on which legal certainty is required or that may be subject to legal challenge. Those are matters on which the Assembly rarely votes, however, and it is unlikely that the provision will have a significant impact on Members who wish to exercise a proxy vote. The matters include a Bill to which section 7A of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 applies, which would mean a vote to alter the size of the Assembly, and a vote on the democratic consent process as per schedule 6A to the Northern Ireland Act 1998. Members will be aware that the first such vote is expected in December, with a vote every four or eight years thereafter, depending on whether the vote receives cross-community support. Paragraph (4)(d) iii and iv relate to votes on motions that either require the support of a number of Members that equals or exceeds two thirds of the total number of seats in the Assembly or require the support of a number of Members that equals or exceeds two thirds of the total number of Members voting on the motion. At the moment, that covers only certain motions, as outlined in detail on page 17 of our report. I will repeat them to ensure that they are read into the record. They are a recommendation for the removal from office of the Comptroller and Auditor General (C&AG) for Northern Ireland, the dissolution of the Assembly, a recommendation for the removal from office of the Northern Ireland Public Services Ombudsman (NIPSO) and a recommendation for the removal of the Assembly Commissioner for Standards. Paragraph (4)(d)(iii) and (iv) are drafted to ensure that, if a similar super-majority provision were included in a future Act, it would be covered by the Standing Order. Finally, paragraph (5) is an interpretation provision. As I mentioned, the Committee was aware that the Standing Order would need to be accompanied by guidance on a range of practical and administrative matters. I intend to use the remainder of my time to cover aspects of those matters. The Committee's consideration covered the notification process, the eligibility criteria, the duration of parental leave and how a proxy vote may be exercised. First, I will cover the notification process. The Committee suggests that the deadline for notifications should be 4.00 pm on the working day prior to the sitting at which the arrangement is due to begin. The Committee is aware that some Members wanted a later deadline, and we considered that. While a later deadline worked during the COVID-19 pandemic, it was not felt to be appropriate in the post-pandemic environment. The integrity of our voting system was one of our major considerations, and a deadline on the day that a proxy vote was to be exercised, with, perhaps, a vote expected an hour or two later, would leave little time to ensure that all the proper processes were in place and Tellers had been informed. Furthermore, the vast majority of parental leave cases are well known in advance, and most Members who wish to avail themselves of a proxy vote will have ample time to submit a notification. I am just noticing the time, Principal Deputy Speaker. Other matters that the report covers include fostering. We will be the first legislature to bring forward that measure. I will also clarify for everyone that the Committee suggests that the duration of application for a proxy vote for parental leave in plenary be a maximum of nine months and that that apply to all categories.
I will just clarify, if I may, Principal Deputy Speaker, that we advise that Tellers should not be proxy votes.
1,792 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.02 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.84).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups.
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.84 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.44 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.38 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.15 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.02 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:27 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.