Debate contribution: Inquiry (Mother and Baby Institutions, Magdalene Laundries and Workhouses) and Redress Scheme Bill: Consideration Stage
Debate contribution by Mr Stewart Dickson on .
- MLA
- Mr Stewart Dickson
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 19 May 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Executive Committee Business
- Heading
- Inquiry (Mother and Baby Institutions, Magdalene Laundries and Workhouses) and Redress Scheme Bill: Consideration Stage
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5549308
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I begin, like all Members who have spoken in the debate, by paying tribute to the victims and survivors and all those who had the bravery to come forward and tell their stories. I thank all who have assisted them. We listened to what people had to tell us, including in Committee, about traumatic circumstances, and we heard very personal stories. I also thank the experts and supporters from a range of organisations who have been with the victims and survivors from the beginning of the Bill process. I sincerely thank all those people. It has been a litany of horrific stories. I do not think that I will ever lose the memory of things that people told us as we conducted our Committee inquiry. We listened to harrowing stories, as my colleague Paula Bradshaw, the Chair of the Committee, said. We heard stories of people who were treated with stone-cold dislike because of the circumstances that they found themselves in. The stories are nothing but harrowing. I welcome the progress that the Bill has made and strongly acknowledge all the people who are at the heart of what we have been trying to achieve through the legislation, particularly those who are in the Public Gallery today. I assure the House that the Committee took its responsibilities in scrutinising the Bill extremely seriously. Like other members, I came to the Committee some time ago, when the Bill was already under way. Again, I pay tribute to the Chair of the Committee not only because she is a party colleague but because I am genuinely impressed by the work of Paula Bradshaw and her knowledge and understanding of all the cases that came before us. Her attention to the detail of the Bill is second to none. Over many months, we received 91 written submissions and heard oral evidence from 24 organisations. We held round-table events across Northern Ireland, and, as has been stated, members of the Committee undertook trauma-informed training before we began the process. I am immensely proud of the work that the Committee did and the work that has been done in the Committee to produce its report and the amendments that are before the House today. I will now speak to the amendments — at least a couple of them — in group 1.
Amendment No 1, which requires the terms of reference to be published within six months of the Act's commencement, is a commitment to survivors that the process will not drift, as all too often happens in these types of processes. It has gone on for so long and has been so difficult for people. Once the Bill gets Royal Assent and becomes law, it must not be allowed to drift. Over the many months of evidence, we have all heard how the uncertainty has caused people emotional trauma. They have waited far too long for the legislation to happen.
Amendment No 10 inserts a new clause on the financial contributions from institutions that are found to have committed systemic failings. It has already been mentioned. A Member raised it in an intervention. This has been an area on which I, as a Committee member, have pressed extremely hard, because, as Members will be aware, in other parts of the United Kingdom, such as Scotland — I also saw a documentary recently on the BBC with regard to similar circumstances in England — and particularly in the Republic of Ireland, it has seemed extremely difficult to be able to get institutions — the perpetrators of these events — to contribute financially. While many of the perpetrators of those harms are long since gone, the institutions, their charitable status and their property remain to this day. We have worked exceedingly hard as a Committee to see what we can do. We pushed back in the discussion that we had with the Executive Office. We looked at best international practice. We took strong legal advice to see what we could do to ensure that those institutions that failed people are made to pay. Regrettably, we are not on particularly strong legal ground with regard to this matter. Amendment No 10 is the best that we can do to achieve responsibility for those organisations to pay for their guilt. It is not where I want to be, nor is it where we should be. We should have an amendment that states that, where the inquiry finds you guilty of the crimes that you have committed against those people, you should pay.
Thank you very much, Chair. I agree with the Chair: it would be useful and helpful if those institutions came forward now and offered restitution. However, it cannot be token restitution. Regrettably, token restitution is what we have seen coming forward from other inquiries in other jurisdictions.
Yes. I thank the Member for her intervention. I absolutely agree with her. We have absolutely gone as far as we can to do that. While we cannot compel, we have certainly taken this to the very limit that I believe is legally possible for us.
Thank you. I agree that we have absolutely pushed the Executive Office to the limit, plus we have tested the legal situation to the best of our ability in respect of this and have looked at best international practice. Moving on, I also welcome the extension of the appeals period from 30 days to 90 days under amendment No 36; an amendment that promotes the scheme actively and ensures that survivors, including those in the diaspora, know of it, how it exists and how to access it. Those are among other amendments that we will support today. They make real and meaningful improvements. I wish to speak to the other two groups of amendments as we —.
964 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Awaiting analysis
This record has not been analysed yet. It is not counted in any total until it has been assessed.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.