Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): The witnesses who will provide evidence today are Glyn Roberts, chief executive of Retail NI; and Chris O'Reilly, vice president of Retail NI. You are welcome to the Justice Committee, gentlemen. I invite you to make an opening statement.

Mr Glyn Roberts (Retail NI): Chair, thank you for the opportunity to present. I will run through our thoughts, from a policy perspective, on what is being proposed, and my colleague Chris will talk about his experience as a business owner.

It is certainly right and proper that 200-year-old legislation is looked at. The legislation needs very much to be updated in the context of the many challenges facing 21st-century town and city centres. Our view, however, is that the Minister should replace and not repeal the laws. The laws should be updated with input from business, the PSNI and the charitable and community sectors, and I know that the Committee will hear from the charitable sector in the next session.

We believe that there is no policing solution to the problem. A multi-agency, multi-departmental approach has to be taken to the many challenges. We can look at what has been done in the Republic of Ireland (ROI), where a degree of comfort was provided for business owners, with gardaí being empowered to direct individuals to move on if they beg at designated locations such as ATMs, vending machines, night safes, dwellings or entrances to business premises during opening hours. Although it would be welcome if such powers were available, reassurance can be obtained only through their rigorous enforcement. Many of our members have concerns about the potential for an increase in nuisance behaviour associated with street activity, such as aggressive begging or antisocial behaviour. In the absence of such proper legislation, it is not unreasonable for them to want their trading space to be safe and consumer-friendly.

We support new, modern and targeted powers that would allow authorities to address genuinely disruptive or intimidating behaviour that could negatively impact on trade and public safety. There is considerable experience in Retail NI — I sit on a number of the working groups of Belfast City Centre Management — and, from that experience, I can say that there is no doubt that we face a significant challenge with the many people on the streets who have drug and alcohol addiction problems and mental health challenges. A multi-agency and multi-departmental approach is the only way forward; there is no solely policing or criminal justice solution. We have much work to do to address the problem.

I will hand over to my colleague, Chris, who will talk about his experience as a business owner.

Mr Chris O'Reilly (Retail NI): Thanks very much for the invitation and for allowing us the time to have a conversation with the Committee.

The current environment is challenging. I have five convenience stores across Belfast, three of which have post offices located in them, so they are a bit of a hub in some areas of the community. They are in high-footfall locations: two of them are on the Ormeau Road. Over the past three or four years, probably since we came out of the pandemic, the problem has become bigger and bigger to the point that it is now almost a weekly occurrence. I have been involved in altercations with individuals who have threatened violence or threatened to burn the business. This morning, I found myself turning sentry mode on in my car, which records my car. I did that because, when I parked outside one of my stores, an individual whom I have had difficulty with over the past two years recognised me as I got out of my car. I had to go into the store; I had to turn the security on. I felt intimidated, to be honest.

I will use that example as a bit of a case study. That individual has been begging on the Ormeau Road in proximity to one of my shops for two years. On one occasion, almost two years ago, we refused him and his partner entry, because they were both extremely altered and were difficult to deal with as they came to the threshold of the store. On that day, the individual threatened a 20-year-old female worker. He threatened to wait for her after work to target her. He also threatened the manager of the store. I have another store 500 yards down the road from that. He went down there, knowing that the store is in my ownership, and actually put hands on the manager in order to vent his frustrations. We made a criminal prosecution against that individual. That was 18 months ago, and that individual still regularly — daily — sits 20 yards from my shop. My staff have to face that individual every day.

The police have little follow-up power, because a crime is not necessarily being committed. It is an absolute crime, however, that my staff, who have been threatened and have had a criminal conviction against that individual, have to walk past him every day. A couple of months ago, as we were outside one of the shops discussing with the manager what we needed to clean and other day-to-day matters to do with the shop, that individual decided, for no reason, to turn on me as he was walking by. Again, we could have phoned the police, given witness statements and done whatever else, but running after such a thing is not the best use of police time.

I put this to the Minister when she kindly hosted us: the changes to the law could make it a little easier for individuals to behave like that, when the problem appears to be getting bigger. It appears to be more of a modern problem that is not reflected in the current legislation. I absolutely endorse some of the findings that Professor Brown put in his paper. It took me a while to read that paper, in which the matter is well articulated. I could never have brought it together in the way in which he articulated it. It is extremely sensible, and the ROI's approach seems to give the police powers on that. When I phoned the police about that individual for perhaps the twenty-fifth time, they were frustrated, because they have no power to come and say, "Look, you are here every day. Why are you here every day?".

Sharps have started to appear on the Ormeau Road. We have a 24-hour access place at the front of the shop where newspapers get dropped off at 3.30 am or whenever. Sharps have started to appear there and in my neighbours' alleyways to the side. I am not saying that that individual is responsible for the sharps, but we are beginning to see a cycle of decline. There are five or six faces that appear on the Ormeau Road with frequency. Some of them do not cause problems: they just do what they do. However, I could show you CCTV footage from two nights ago on my phone that shows an individual who is a regular on the Ormeau Road coming into the shop, ripping signs down and giving out, because we did not have an ATM available and he was not happy with what he heard. I have 18-year-old and 19-year-old students working there in the evening, because they are not available during the day, and a reasonably mature supervisor. They are not there to manage those complex problems. Unfortunately, however, that is the way that things are going for many businesses in high-footfall urban environments. It defies logic that that that environment would be made a little easier for those individuals. I am absolutely mindful of the fact that there are people who are in need and that the issue is complicated, but I am trying to create employment, pay off my debt and provide a service in the community. That is a weekly occurrence, and it continues to get worse.

Mr Roberts: I can maybe reinforce some of those points. I had a good conversation with senior police officers about what is being proposed, and their analogy was, "We don't need the toolbox thrown out; we need new tools in the toolbox to address this problem". The PSNI is very much on the same page as us, and its views are absolutely critical in defining what success looks like in tackling the problem.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): Thank you very much, Glyn and Chris, for your presentation. We received evidence a number of weeks ago from Professor Brown, whom you mentioned. In his paper, he proposed a new provision:

That would basically give a constable the power to:

I will not read the whole thing; you have read it. Would that sort of provision protect your staff?

Mr O'Reilly: Yes, it would.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): Does it need to be added to? Is there anything that needs to be created apart from that provision?

Mr Roberts: Chair, in England and Wales, the police have access to public spaces protection orders and dispersal orders, which Northern Ireland does not have. Again, that area could be looked at. There is good practice elsewhere, as we highlighted, in the Republic of Ireland and the rest of the UK that could be adapted, but the solution lies in a co-design process between, as I said, the police, business, the charitable sector and service providers. That is ultimately where we need to land this: a co-design effort. We cannot unilaterally repeal and not put something in its place that is fit for purpose for 2025, never mind 1825. The Committee is looking at the issue, and I suggest that a number of amendments could be tabled to reflect where we are, where the police are, where the charitable sector is and, indeed, what Professor Brown put forward. It is not beyond the bounds of possibility that we could get something that works.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): The professor's paper also talks about:

You talked about people entering your premises and said that that is where some of the problems started. Is something like that provision also required?

Mr O'Reilly: I would put it in simpler layman's terms. I would like to ask for protection in a situation where an individual continues to return daily to the same place and create the same difficulties repetitively. It can be harassment of customers, with customers then complaining; issues at the entrance to the property; harassment of staff; or, unfortunately, shoplifting. In layman's terms, I am looking for something that is able to protect us, something a little more sophisticated than the current criminal laws.

My staff are like family. I am totally reliant on them to deliver for me, and they rely on me to protect them. I cannot seem to rely on being able to phone the police and say, "Look, I've an individual here who is loitering with intent and has caused problems at the location previously. Can you help me with that?". I am not really getting responses from the police on that. Again, we effectively do not have a neighbourhood force in the area; we do not have that relationship built up; and we do not have the bobby on the beat who knows who it is and can go along and do things a bit more proactively. We have a vacuum, whereby I do not feel that, if I have a shoplifter, I have a mechanism to deal with that. If I have an incident inside the shop where someone falls and hurts themselves, we have a process to work our way through that incident, but, with this, there is a vacuum, and it feels like that vacuum is deteriorating.

I hope that we can came up with something a little more sophisticated. Taking the laws away altogether will not address a growing problem in Northern Ireland society that we did not traditionally have, namely that the individuals who bring this activity tend to have addiction issues, mental health issues and whatever else. It almost feels like you are taking a hands-off approach rather than helping us cajole it in the right direction and, more important, protecting my business. I pay over £1,000 a week in business rates to protect my businesses on the Ormeau Road. It is hard. We have faced extreme cost pressures over the past five years — I talk about this to anybody who will listen — but I continue to create employment and take financial risk. I have personal guarantees set against me to deliver what I do. I feel that that part of my business is not protected in legislation and that there is a gap in the police's ability to protect me. To you, as legislators, I say this: can we come up with something that does not feel like a hands-off approach and protects us?

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): Notwithstanding your negative experiences, has either of you experienced or do you have evidence of organised begging that is coercive, where the beggar is a victim of coercion?

Mr O'Reilly: I do not, no.

Mr Roberts: I would not be surprised if that practice is there. Our members deal with a high-level of organised crime daily, so I would not rule that out entirely.

You have to look at it in the wider context. We make that clear in our submission. We face an epidemic — a tsunami — of shoplifting, assault of retail staff and antisocial behaviour that is off the scale. We also have a situation where there are hundreds fewer neighbourhood police officers, and that is why we are clear that we support the Chief Constable's call for a financial settlement for the PSNI. We need those neighbourhood officers on the ground. We can make all the changes to legislation that we like, but, unless we have enough police on the ground — in particular front-line neighbourhood police — we will never solve that problem. We have had numerous discussions with the PSNI, and that is absolutely vital if we are to solve the problem.

We need to get to the point where we have a proper co-design approach. A lot of charities, service providers and street pastors are trying to fill a gap that statutory agencies should fill. Ultimately, it is vulnerable shop staff who pay the price. The Committee knows that we strongly support the forthcoming sentencing Bill, which will make assault of retail staff a specific statutory offence. That is good, but, ultimately, we will never solve all this unless we have enough neighbourhood police officers.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): OK. Thank you, Glyn.

Ms Egan: Thank you, Glyn and Chris, for coming in. I declare a bit of an interest: in a life before politics, I worked in retail in an off-licence. I often dealt with people who were under the influence, so I have absolutely no doubt that retail workers find themselves in difficult situations. It is not good to hear that it is getting worse.

I have real concerns, because the current legislative framework clearly is not working. I totally agree with you, Glyn: it needs a different approach — a multi-agency approach. I do not want us to get ahead of ourselves. I know that the Minister has said that she is keen to explore further ways to protect retail workers in her sentencing Bill. I am keen to hear how you have engaged with the Minister and her Department on the proposals throughout the process.

Mr Roberts: We have regular contact with the Minister. We had a good, forthright and direct meeting with the Minister a few months ago. We work with the police at every level from the Chief Constable to the officers on the beat.

It was disappointing — I do not know whether it was an administrative error — that we did not receive the departmental consultation on this. That is why we are keen to give evidence at this stage. Our ideas and policy perspectives and, indeed, Chris's lived experience can be invaluable in making the Bill fit for purpose so that, ultimately, it delivers real change not just for the businesses that we represent but for the many individuals who, through no fault of their own, have found themselves on the street and facing significant problems. We have always adopted a solution-based approach to the problem, and the Minister is always in listening mode, which is good to see.

Ms Egan: I appreciate that. Criminalisation has not worked, and we need a different approach. It is important to bring other partners round the table. I agree that it is not entirely a justice issue. I appreciate you both coming before the Committee today.

Mr Kingston: Thank you, Glyn and Chris, for your attendance and paper. We can all agree that a law that is not being enforced and where it would be seen as an anomaly if it were enforced is a bit of a nonsense. However, I have strong concerns that repealing the vagrancy and begging laws would send out the public message that it is somehow legal to sleep rough in the city centre and beg on the streets. Those things should be discouraged.

I am aware of many people who have experienced harassment, intimidation and fear and felt threatened, particularly in parts of our city centre. Three weeks ago, I attended a Belfast One inter-agency meeting that was quite helpful. At that time, a video of a brawl in the city centre was circulating; many of you will have seen it. I understand that there are people who are vulnerable and have addiction or mental health problems, but there were frightening consequences for the people on the street who witnessed that brawl and those who viewed the video. The video ended up in the media. Someone who attended the meeting, who runs an evening establishment, said that, since news about the video went out on a morning radio show, he had lost three Christmas dinner bookings from groups from outside Belfast: they had cancelled because they did not feel safe. There are real consequences when people feel that the streets are not safe.

As with what you said, Glyn, my concern is about ensuring that the police have the tools in their kit. I am not sure whether we are bringing the police in to give evidence on the matter.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): We are.

Mr Kingston: Good. It is important that we do that.

At that meeting, a senior police officer talked about the powers that exist in England that they do not have here, such as public spaces protection orders; civic injunctions for antisocial behaviour; dispersal orders; enhanced use of community resolution notices; and the ability to disperse people and move them on. It is relevant not only to the retail areas that we are talking about but to interface areas, when the police need to disperse people. Whether you provide them today or in further papers, I am interested in your thoughts on the specific powers that are lacking here but would help.

We must never take for granted our city centre and retail hubs. They are all vulnerable, especially in the modern era, with online shopping and out-of-town shopping centres. The retail hubs are vital for society and if we are to have healthy towns and cities. They are vulnerable and must be protected. We should not assume that they will always be successful. It is important for us to ensure that the police have the right tools to ensure that city centres are safe and feel safe for people coming into them. Do you have specific thoughts on the powers that should be provided to the police and council officers through by-laws that they can enforce?

Mr Roberts: There are the public spaces protection orders in England and Wales. There is the experience in the Republic of Ireland as well. Part of Belfast city centre is in the constituency that Brian represents. I will put the matter in context. We have a member in Belfast city centre, and every member of their staff has been assaulted. Those staff might then be in court giving evidence for two or three days of a week, which, for a small independent retailer, is a lot of time. No worker should ever be in that position or work in that kind of environment. Consumers not just in Belfast but in many other town and city centres likewise need to feel that they are safe to shop and socialise. This week, I met one of the Assistant Chief Constables about Operation Season's Greetings, which is the big campaign to make sure that, at Christmas, our high streets are safe for shoppers, people who are socialising, visitors and shop staff. I hope that we can reassure consumers that our high streets are safe; that is what it is about.

One of the things that we need to do in Belfast city centre in particular is make it a living community again — that is the big challenge — but that will be extremely difficult if we have a problem with crime and antisocial behaviour. We need to work harder on that. It comes back to the multi-agency approach. Policing is not the sole solution; it is about addressing the many people on the streets who have drug and alcohol problems. On the lower Ormeau Road, for example, the number of hostels is an issue: 20 hostels, I think, have been located there. Why cluster so many hostels in one area? We have to ask questions and take a joined-up approach by working across not only agencies but Departments and councils. There are a lot of moving parts to the problem, and we require a solution that is equally multifaceted.

Mr Kingston: OK. Thanks.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): You talked about assaults on staff. There are laws to deal with assault, and you mentioned the fact that people go to court. Would new, modernised vagrancy laws help to reduce the number of such assaults?

Mr O'Reilly: In my case, yes. If the police had had such powers, they could have attended and moved the individual on.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): That would have prevented the assaults.

Mr O'Reilly: A better way of describing it is that they would have had the tools in the toolbox to deal with the individual.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): Would that prevent the assaults?

Mr O'Reilly: Correct.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): OK.

Mr O'Reilly: This is about the example of one person, but the situation can be multiplied hundreds of times. That one person is a ticking time bomb who sits in proximity to my shop and staff. The individual has addiction problems and a complex life. I have sympathy and empathy for all that, but my duty of care is in protecting my employees. Two months ago, I was standing outside the shop with the manager and a supervisor talking about what we needed. Why were we standing on the street? The walls of my shop have ears, so I needed to talk to them outside. The chap walked by and tried to intimidate me with a stare. My manager said, "This can't continue". As he said that, the guy kicked off. That guy sits there five days a week with a chip on his shoulder because we brought a prosecution against him, but he is allowed to stay.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): Glyn, you mentioned public spaces protection orders: what is your understanding of how they work?

Mr Roberts: We have asked our colleagues in other trade bodies for more information about them. We await that further information, and we will be happy to supply it. That is one aspect to look at. Another is the power that the gardaí in the Republic of Ireland have to direct individuals to move on if they are begging at certain designated locations, such as ATMs, vending machines, night safes and, during opening hours, entrances to business premises. We do not have to look too far for good, practical case studies of how amended legislation can help address the problem.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): OK. Thank you.

Mr McGlone: Thank you for being here and relaying your experiences. I am conscious that we do not want to move into a one-size-fits-all situation, because it is a complex issue. I am trying to get my head around this: people other than those whom the current law may specify as "vagrant" could meet on the street people who have committed serious offences against them and their families. It is not just about people who may be homeless.

The other thing is that, if the person who is aggressive towards you or a member of your staff is, for example, resident in a hostel, they may well be a risk to residents of that hostel, many of whom are vulnerable as well. To my mind, that emphasises the need for a bit of joined-up governance. That brings me back to the point that that person, like other people who commit even worse crimes than that individual might have committed, may be seen on the street and the victims of their crimes may meet them on the street, but, if they have served time, in that instance, legally they cannot be moved on, unless they present themselves aggressively, commit another crime or are threatening or menacing towards you, in which case there is already recourse to the courts.

I am trying to get into my mind what you expect. I will make this clear point: it is not right to get rid of the existing legislation and have nothing better with which to replace it. That is a key point and mirrors much of what Brian said. However, you are facing the problem on the street: what should be done in real, practical terms, perhaps through a multi-agency approach, and what should that multi-agency approach, including that from the police, be?

Mr Roberts: Complex Lives is a good example of that. Do not get me wrong: we are not stereotyping anyone. We absolutely realise that we face a mental health epidemic and that there are people with drug and alcohol addiction issues. Policing on its own is not a solution to that; it is about all the agencies going the extra mile to support those people. It is not about saying that all the people in a hostel are criminals; absolutely not. We would never stereotype or label anybody like that, because every individual has their own story. It is part of a multifaceted problem that requires a multifaceted solution across numerous agencies and, at times, by Departments working together. We do not have a great track record of that kind of multi-agency approach; it tends to be very siloed. We need to ensure that whatever comes up in this process works and that we have a clear idea of where we want to get to in order to make sure that we support and protect not only the individuals who are on the street but businesses such as Chris's and their staff, who fulfil an invaluable role as community retailers.

Mr McGlone: I get the principle, but I am looking for the how, if you have it. That is the area that I want to move into.

Mr Roberts: We have outlined the experiences in the Republic of Ireland and, indeed, England and Wales as a possible solution. Professor Brown's paper also puts forward ideas and solutions. First and foremost, it is about modernising 200-year-old legislation and, as I said, making sure that it is fit for purpose for 2025, not 1825.

Mr McGlone: Yes, but, looking at your experiences, if you were sitting where we are, what practical measures would you put in place? Take the guy who is intimidatory, threatening or menacing — call it what you will — to you and your staff. He may well do the same thing down the street in the hostel to staff members and vulnerable people who live there. What practical measures would you take, aside from the thing that immediately springs out, which is that social services should work closely with the likes of the police and whichever agency is in charge of the hostel to address that situation? I will put it another way: how do you deal with that problem and remove that person from your shop without creating a problem for some other shop 200 or 300 yards down the street? That is my point.

Mr O'Reilly: There should be some sort of trigger point, if that individual continues with the repeat behaviour and is displacing themselves to different businesses. It would need to be picked up at that point.

Beyond the policing stuff, as far as the societal stuff or whatever else goes, I am no expert in that area, but I feel that we should have some sort of law that allows the police to come out and take action when a business owner feels that their business is being unfairly targeted, so that individuals who do that can be moved away and told to cease and desist from the activity that they are involved in. That may be too simplistic a view, however.

Mr McGlone: I want to tease that out a wee bit further, Chris. Have the police ever questioned or arrested the said person under harassment laws?

Mr O'Reilly: Not to my knowledge.

Mr McGlone: Would that not be appropriate? That is the thing that springs to my mind.

Mr Roberts: Ultimately, if someone is a repeat offender, there will have to be some sanction at some point. We are not saying that that should not be the case. If someone is aggressively begging from and harassing customers and staff, there will, ultimately, have to be some sanction. It will be about the police's view of what suits them in a practical way. The problem there is that there are not enough neighbourhood police officers even to respond to that. Committee members will know that we surveyed our members on that. The follow-up with the police is hugely problematic now because they do not have the numbers on the ground.

It is about public spaces protection orders, but there is also a gap in the legislation to deal with on-street drinking. The police can do nothing about that; they cannot confiscate or seize alcohol when that problem is there, so that is another area of concern. There are lots of things that could be done by way of legislation to give the police more powers to address issues in certain areas. There are practical solutions that we could arrive at. As you said, Patsy, however, the situation where legislation is repealed and nothing is put in its place is not the best way forward.

Mr McGlone: It is disastrous.

Mr Roberts: That is why we have said that this is about replacing rather than repealing.

Mr McGlone: Thank you both very much.

Miss Hargey: Thanks very much. I know Chris from my constituency.

The first thing to say is that nobody should be intimidated or threatened in their place of work. It goes without saying that it does not matter who it is. At the same time, though, the legislation is from the era of Charles Dickens. It is draconian, and it criminalises some of the most vulnerable people in our communities. I know that you have already said that. The legislation is outdated and needs to be repealed in its current form.

We want to deal with retailers' issues and concerns as well as those of communities. That is the thing for me, Glyn. We can look at what they do in the South. We are pushing it on up the street, so we are not dealing with it; we are just pushing it on. We need to take a more rounded approach to the matter. I do not know whether replacing vagrancy legislation is the right way to do that either, to be honest. We need to look at whether there are gaps in other areas. That is why Patsy asked whether you had examples of how we could look at this. We will have the PSNI in, and we have asked them before about whether there is other legislation. I agree with Patsy on the stuff that you were talking about, Chris: that is harassment. Why is there not an exclusion zone when there are certain types of behaviour? That is down to an individual, however; that is not true of everybody who is homeless or finds themselves begging.

Mr O'Reilly: Absolutely.

Miss Hargey: There are different issues. There are individuals who are violent. Of course, the law needs to protect people who are on the receiving end of that. The question is this: can or should that be done by way of vagrancy laws? I recognise that repealing that legislation creates a gap, but is it being enforced anyway? There is already a gap if the existing legislation is not being utilised anyway.

I completely empathise with local residents. They should not be intimidated or treated like that, and nor should shopworkers, who are some of our lowest-paid workers generally in the economy. What are the alternatives, and what protections can we put in place? I am keen to hear about that. Glyn has touched on the sentencing legislation that will come forward, but have you identified any other areas that we could raise with the police and the Department to ensure that it is reduced? We have tried to work with the Health and Justice Departments to make sure that there is no breakdown, and it is still a very siloed system. The "Housing First" approach should be the way forward for the issue of rough sleeping. Work was done on that, but nothing has been done since. The Departments of Health, Communities and Justice should work together to provide accommodation and wrap-around support for individuals to take them off the street and make sure that they get support for addiction, mental health and trauma issues. The Simon Community is giving evidence to the Committee next, and it has used financial transactions capital (FTC) to purchase new homes in east Belfast. Can we make sure that there are no gaps? Even if we keep the legislation, the problems will continue unless we do some of the preventative work.

We are more than happy to look at legislation for the policing or community safety response. We do not expect you to have all the answers now, but, as we move through the piece and look at other legislation, we want to keep the dialogue going. Everybody is keen to protect workers, the community and those with vulnerabilities and to make sure that they feel safe and get the support that they need. I do not know whether that should be done through the vagrancy legislation, because some of the issues are being conflated. I understand that a gap will be created, so what do we do in the meantime? Previously, Health and Justice had a joint meeting, and there could be a tripartite meeting with Communities to look at the issues and at the prevention and intervention work to ensure that the Departments work more collaboratively. Why is the "Housing First" programme not being driven forward? Where is it? Is there cross-departmental collaboration? There needs to be a focus on a preventative approach where people are vulnerable or are potentially violent because of vulnerabilities and to prevent workers from feeling intimidated. Chair, it may be worth looking at doing that.

You mentioned the attacks on retail staff. Will you write to us if you have identified other areas or gaps in the work? It does not have to be in this legislation or the current Bill. There are two future Bills: the victims of crime Bill, which will be the last one, and the sentencing Bill, which is due before Christmas or shortly afterwards.

Mr Roberts: Maybe, in 2025, it should not be called "vagrancy legislation". There needs to be some statutory and legal provision in the Justice Bill to cover some of that area. I would not call it "vagrancy". The Vagrancy Act is so old that it predates Charles Dickens and was for a completely different era and world. It has to be a co-design effort between all the agencies, businesses and the PSNI. Several working groups have been set up in the city centre, but it is clear from the statutory agencies that their budgets have been cut. A lot of the provision to help the homeless in Belfast city centre comes from charities, and they face many pressures as well. It is about the co-design piece, and it is a good idea to bring together the three Committees or Ministers to discuss how to move the situation on.

The sentencing Bill will be critical, and the assault of retail staff should become a statutory offence, alongside the provision for the emergency services and first responders. We also need to look at the fines for shoplifting, because they are not fit for purpose. We suggest having a £1,000 fine as the starting point for shoplifting offences. We need to push that because there is a perception that shoplifting is not a real offence and is a victimless crime. Independent retailers such as Chris have shoplifting every day, and it makes their small margins even smaller.

I absolutely agree that a multi-agency approach is needed, but we also need a zero-tolerance approach to shoplifting, antisocial behaviour and assaults of shop staff. Part of my job is to look at members' CCTV footage. It is shocking to see young, vulnerable shop staff facing dreadful assaults. We have to make sure that we adopt a zero-tolerance approach to all of that. Ultimately, that means significant sanctions for people who break the law, whether by shoplifting, assaulting staff, engaging in antisocial behaviour or doing all those things.

Who made the decision to locate so many hostels in one place? Again, you have to look at that. I suspect that the Department for Communities has a big role in that.

Miss Hargey: Or bookies or off-licences.

Mr Roberts: Absolutely. As I said at the start, there are a lot of moving parts. We could right a lot of things, if we had that partnership approach. During the previous Assembly mandate, we had the high street task force, which was effective in bringing together the Departments, councils, businesses, trade unions and the voluntary sector to agree a report. We might need to look at having something like that task force to address the problems and make sure that all of the right Ministers, agencies, businesses, trade unions and voluntary sector organisations are at the table, we focus on solutions and we ask ourselves what success ultimately looks like.

Miss Hargey: Thank you.

Mr Bradley: Thanks very much for the presentation. There were some good questions from other members and some answers to some of the things that I was going to ask about. It is interesting.

Do you see any benefits to moving towards a more supportive approach to homelessness and street begging rather than a punitive one? You touched on assaults on staff and shoplifting, but do you think that addressing vagrancy would increase footfall and the safety and well-being of customers and staff throughout the premises? Have you had any discussions with the business improvement districts (BIDs) on tackling issues in town and city centre locations? I think not only of vagrancy and homelessness but the increasing problem of assemblies that are threatening or lead to harassment or antisocial behaviour. Have you had any discussions specifically on the new detrimental signs that are coming into shopping areas?

Mr O'Reilly: I hope that I have picked up the pitch of your question correctly. Both business improvement districts in Belfast city centre responded to the consultation. There were maybe nine or 10 respondents, with two being the BIDs. They echo the sentiments that we have talked about around the table.

I will go back to what I said. It is quite simplistic. In layman's terms, the ask from me and the business environment that I operate in is this: can we make the situation a little better? Taking a stand-off approach does not feel right. Do you want to be totally punitive in your approach? No, because I get the sense that that comes across as a bit draconian, but can you be totally stand-offish? I really do not think so.

Mr Roberts: It is a given that our high streets need to be safe, inclusive, shared spaces. People need to have the confidence that they can shop, socialise and feel safe. That is why we are working heavily with the PSNI on Operation Season's Greetings, which will be launched very soon. We have to ensure that, particularly in the run-up to Christmas, when a lot more people are on our high streets, they are safe and can get home safely. That is not to forget shop staff. One of the big challenges that we face at this time of year, when shop staff are under huge pressure, is asking customers to be respectful to shop staff, who are under great pressure to make sure that everyone gets the products and presents and has a good time this Christmas.

Mr Bradley: I want to expand business improvement districts to across Northern Ireland as opposed to just the cities. The problems that are manifest in Belfast and Londonderry are just as relevant in rural areas.

To address the last point that I made, do you think that legislation should be included on threatening assembly or assembly leading to harassment or antisocial behaviour?

Mr Roberts: We need to ensure that, as I have said, the police have the tools to do the job, so, yes, that is obviously part and parcel of it.

We helped to draw up the legislation on business improvement districts 15 years ago. I think that you have nine or 10 business improvement districts. You have three in Belfast city centre. They are a fairly good model, and not only have we been champions of the business improvement districts but we have been doing a lot of work to revitalise the chamber network throughout Northern Ireland, because there are still towns that do not have chambers of commerce traders' groups. They are important as well, in engaging with the councils but, more important, engaging with the policing and community safety partnerships (PCSPs) and the police. Yes, there is more work that we need to do on that front.

Mr O'Reilly: I will take up your point about legislation around threatening assembly. Let us take the example of a shopkeeper who is maybe not from our land and has chosen to come here to make their way by setting up their own business. If they are not protected, yes, you probably should include that in your legislation.

Mr Bradley: Yes, but I was thinking generally. No matter what someone's background is, if they have a shop and groups assemble outside for whatever reason — young people, adults or whatever — the shopkeepers, the staff and the customers need protection of some sort, and the police need to be able to move in and move people on.

Mr O'Reilly: I agree. I have sampled that. We tend to get that over the summer holidays on the Ormeau Road. When the kids are off school and it gets a little later, you get a group of challenging adolescents who continually return to the shop. We had the police involved this summer because individuals were coming in to shoplift eggs. They were climbing onto the roof of our shop and dispersing eggs over the front of our shop towards the oncoming traffic on the Ormeau Road. If you had the power to get in at source, break it down and move the kids on before it gets to the point where they are doing something that can be perceived as criminal, yes, that would be helpful. I have had many's the summer of that.

Ms Ferguson: Thank you, Glyn and Chris. I do not want to go over old ground, particularly what my colleague mentioned. Obviously, it is intolerable for retail workers and the likes of you business owners to be subject to the range of issues and findings from the report. I read the report, and I welcome the forthcoming legislation in the sentencing Bill. I think that we all want the same thing. We need to protect you and the workers, but, likewise, we need to protect and support the most vulnerable and to have a compassionate approach to that. We all want the same thing, and there is a balancing act in how we go about it. It is about inter-agency work, and Glyn mentioned a range of areas and issues that are complex and need to be resourced.

I am conscious that it will not change overnight and that it is about taking a proactive approach. What proactive approach is Retail NI and the business sector taking to bring collaborative agencies around the table to support each other? We did it in Derry a year ago, and we got business involved. It is about building relationships and trust. It is about understanding the resources that are available and doing the best with what we have but, likewise, advocating for the additional resources that we need, whether that is our Supporting People organisations, our hostels or our neighbourhood policing team, which is trying to do its best. However, to be honest, if anything happens in the city, the neighbourhood policing team disappears, because it is resourced into more pressing areas, even though it is trying to build relationships with the most vulnerable and has been doing a good job. There are willing partners in our cities and towns that are coming together collectively, but they need resource and support. I am interested to know what plans Retail NI has to support organisations coming together whilst looking at the legislative side of things.

Mr Roberts: We did a comprehensive survey of our members — it is included in our submission — about their experiences of shoplifting, antisocial behaviour and all of it. That is in there. Following that, we engaged with PCSPs, the Chief Constable, the Policing Board and other agencies. What struck us, on the PCSP front in particular, is how few of our members know what a PCSP is. There is a lot of work to do there. I think that there are proposals to change and restructure the Policing Board and equally the PCSP. There are very few business people on PCSPs.

We have done the hard yards with all those agencies. We talk to the police almost daily. We are open to going further and faster in how we reach out to other agencies. We are making progress, but it is slow, and we need to up the scale of that progress. Likewise, we are on the same page as the Chief Constable when it comes to making sure that the PSNI gets a proper financial settlement. You rightly talked about neighbourhood police officers. They are the front-line troops, so to speak, in the battle. We need more neighbourhood police; there are hundreds fewer now than there were.

The second thing is about retail and business crime generally. If you look at the policing plan that the Policing Board produces, you will see that retail and business crime barely gets a mention. We need to make sure that all the agencies, even those within the Department of Justice criminal justice orbit, have clear recognition of the problems and challenges and of what the solutions are. We have spent the past two years educating some of the bodies, but the PCSPs have their own get-together, and Chris and I presented to them. There is a lot of work to be done on their knowledge and understanding of the pressures that retailers and other high-street businesses face with crime.

Ms Ferguson: You are very much fixated on policing. Where does the community side come in? What about our homeless organisations? They do vital work in supporting the most vulnerable and do so with a lack of resources. Where has the business sector helped to enable and support those organisations? Those people are vulnerable, and I do not want to conflate those who are homeless and vulnerable with other areas of crime that are totally separate from the vagrancy aspect. We need to be careful about that.

On the vagrancy aspect, we are talking about homeless people and people who are begging. They are the most vulnerable people. They could be my brother or sister or your mother or father on the basis of their circumstances. They are people who live in your neighbourhood and are part of the community. A collective community response is needed. I know that, like everybody else, businesses are busy and that that is not necessarily your primary remit, but it is about everybody going the extra mile to work collectively, particularly around homelessness and those who have to go out to beg in the street or do so under coercive control. As well as their ongoing work with the police and the neighbourhood policing team, what has the role of businesses been to date in liaising with community organisations, homeless organisations and hostel organisations in order to support them to support the most vulnerable? If you speak to those in a neighbourhood policing team, they will tell you that their job cannot be done without the support of our hostels and the Supporting People programme etc.

Mr Roberts: First and foremost, it is not that we have a fixation on policing. There is no sole policing; it is always a partnership between businesses, the general public, the police, community organisations and statutory agencies. That is why we said at the start of the presentation that there needs to be a co-designed effort to meet the challenge.

You asked us what we as a trade association are doing. I put that back to you: what are the Department of Justice, the Department for Communities and all the other Departments doing to address this? We will meet and engage with as many organisations as we can to deal with the challenge. Ultimately, however, it is up to Ministers to bring forward the key players and to agree a strategy. To date, that has not happened in any meaningful or sustainable way.

One of our suggestions was to recall the high street task force, which brought together six or seven Departments, businesses, trade unions and the voluntary sector. Although the whole issue of crime and antisocial behaviour was part of it, it looked beyond that to other challenges facing the high streets. However, the current Executive refuse to recall the high street task force, and I cannot understand why, because that body brought together all those bodies or agencies, call them what you like. Yes, we need to have some vehicle that brings together all the respective agencies and better communication. The sentencing piece is in there as well. We are absolutely up for that approach. We cannot bring those agencies round the table; we have Ministers to do that. That is why we need to see Ministers step up to the plate and start getting that round-table approach. We cannot solve this alone and treat it as purely a policing problem. It can be solved only through a multidisciplinary, multi-Department, multi-agency approach.

Ms Ferguson: I agree with you about the higher strategic level. I just came from a meeting about the Department of Health and the Department for Communities strategically working to address homelessness, so strategic work is being done cross-departmentally. It could be resourced better — it needs way more investment — but there is ongoing work at the strategic level. My question was more focused on the community level. You have a local community business. It is about work in the local community. I know that that is difficult. Is there a vehicle through which your local community comes together to address the ongoing issues that you mentioned, Chris?

Mr O'Reilly: No. At the time when we were coming out of COVID, I endeavoured to set up a business organisation on the Ormeau Road, but, unfortunately, once the crisis dissipated so did all my potential members, just as we were getting to the point of bringing together a constitution, because they were distracted with the running of their businesses.

From a community interaction point of view, I support my local soccer club, my local GAA club, the local band hall and the local community group, Open Ormeau. My door is continually open to that. I am trying to run five small businesses that are being squeezed at every angle, and I have created employment for just over 100 people, with a £1·4 million payroll and all the benefits that we pay back into the centre through taxation and whatever else.

I did not expect to be asked that question today, to be honest. I did not expect to be in solution mode here. I was coming here in my capacity as vice chair and as a business operator who is saying, "I need help, because this problem continues to arise". Shoplifting continues to rise, and the problem of people being difficult around premises is getting bigger and bigger. I come with a simple man approach of saying, "I need a little bit of help". I did not expect to be asked to provide a solution to my immediate problems. As for what goes beyond that, I did not think that I would need to give an answer to that today.

Ms Ferguson: I suppose that we all want solutions to the issues that you are dealing with, because it is unacceptable. On a wider, strategic level, we know that it will not be solved in the short term, while your retail workers and you, as a business, deal with those issues daily. The ideal is to do both. There needs to be a community-led approach to assist, but it is not on retail to provide that. It is on the wider community to come together to support the most vulnerable when it comes to homelessness.

On the wider issue of what you have to deal with daily, the inter-agency, cross-departmental work at a strategic level is, as you say, bitty at this time. That wider issue needs to be addressed. We all want to see cross-departmental working at a strategic level to support the likes of you and people in the local community, but it is difficult. Unfortunately, we have to look at both, and we do not have a quick solution for you.

Mr Roberts: We were the first trade body to produce a well-being plan for our members and their staff. We launched here in 2022. We were the first business group to do that. We absolutely get the challenges around mental health and the role that we have to play. We flagged up to the Department of Health the fact that we need to be part of the conversation about an obesity strategy. The perception is that business owners are the last people whom officials in the various silos that make up government here speak to about a lot of issues.

A lot of it is in the system.

Business is not just what Caoimhe Archibald is doing. Business has a role in every Department. We are up for those conversations and that engagement, but, at times, we are not invited to the table to input into this. We, as a trade body, are being as proactive as we can. We produce surveys, plans and detailed reports, and we produced a detailed submission to the Programme for Government. We are up for all those things, but the onus is on the Executive generally to work smarter and more collaboratively on issues such as this.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): Brian, you wanted to come in. I will press you to ask a brief question, and I ask for a brief response.

Mr Kingston: This will be brief, and I ask for a brief response.

Chris, I am interested in what you said earlier. In your experience or in yours, Glyn, have you noticed that, when problems have arisen, there is a difference in the statutory response in the city centre compared with the out-of-city-centre retail hubs such as those on the Ormeau Road? Do you feel that one or the other receives less support, or is the support similar?

Mr O'Reilly: My neighbourhood retail officer was in Mace on the Ormeau Road yesterday. That is the first time that I have seen him in two years.

Mr Kingston: Do you think that there is more support in the city centre? I am not saying that there is.

Mr O'Reilly: My worry is that, with the intensification of support in the city centre, the problem is displaced to other areas.

Mr Kingston: Other arterial routes should not be forgotten.

Mr O'Reilly: Yes, but — .

Mr Kingston: Is there rough sleeping there?

Mr O'Reilly: No.

Mr Kingston: Does rough sleeping happen more in the city centre?

Mr O'Reilly: The nub of the problem is someone who presents as homeless. It is about being able to unpick some of that when the police get involved. I do not believe that any of the individuals who appear on the Ormeau Road are homeless. I believe that they are there to feed the addiction that they have, truthfully. The addiction means that they cannot hold down work.

Ms Ferguson: That is where we need to be really clear. This is about vagrancy and homelessness, and there is a wider issue of individuals —.

Mr O'Reilly: That probably unpicks it really well. If you are a business operator and there is someone who, you know, genuinely needs help, you provide help to them. We have got to the situation — many city centre retailers have got to the same situation — where the individuals whom we are tackling present as homeless but it is the addiction that drives the activity that they are involved in, be that shoplifting, assault or dwelling for income. For me, it is about getting under the skin of that.

If I were to come in in the morning and someone was unfortunate enough to be sleeping in the front door of my shop, I would not step over that individual and not make them feel welcome. There is a coffee machine getting turned on in there. They will get a cup of coffee, and we will put the hot food on. They are probably getting something to eat and whatever else, but the problem is whenever someone stays at the front of your premises relentlessly and does not move on. If they have a complex life, they can create complex problems in a business environment. That is probably the nicest way to say that.

The Chairperson (Mr Frew): Thank you very much for your time and your presentation. The next item is on the same subject, so you are welcome to stay in the room if you wish.