Ms Sandra Peake:

There are three levels to it, the first being accredited ten-week programmes on, for example, grief, trauma, the helping relationship, compassion, fatigue and the cost to people working in this field. These are distinct courses. Information is also provided on the very prominent link between trauma and addiction. We have a suite of eight community-based courses across a range of venues, which provide people with accreditation and equip them to have a greater awareness of the subject areas in question.

The BSc programme at Queen's University Belfast covers a broad area around psychosocial responses, which is about recognising the role of treatment modalities, but at a wider level is also about how a societal response can be best encouraged.

The professional development level involves victim and survivor trainers, supplemented by lectures, instructing social work students, nursing students and teachers for two weeks to make them more responsive to and aware of the issues presented by victims and survivors who they will meet. This has been fascinating, as many of the social work students are 18 or 19 years of age and are asking why they must do this, seeing as how the Troubles are over. By week two, they are reporting that they understand why, for example, their aunts are the way they are, they had not realised what had happened in their families and that the course has been beneficial.

The programme is evaluated by practice users and clinical teachers, who state that they have seen an improvement in practice. Social workers and, hopefully, nurses are more responsive towards the people they meet.

Deputy Smith asked about threats. The worrying trend is that this matter does not just relate to dissidents. At a broader level, it also relates to loyalist intimidation and threats, in that individuals and families are presenting under threat. The difficulty lies in how the threat is verified. It is verified by the police, who come to our door and ask where the people can go and how they can stay safe. For example, the police service asks about what it can do as regards young fellows whose names have appeared on lists. Where are these people safe and who will take responsibility for them? This issue has proven difficult. We have considered which providers in our community might take them, but they understandably will not open themselves up to the risk of accepting people who are under threat. We would argue that the process of verifying threats and providing meaningful support needs to be examined as a matter of urgency. People are distressed. It is an increasing problem among those who present to us.

I will ask Ms McCallan to answer the question on a comprehensive process.

Regarding the Eames-Bradley group, the payment of £12,000 sadly became the story for the media and effectively shut the process down before anyone considered the wider report, which also suggested a range of mechanisms for dealing with the past. As an organisation, we must take account of the fact that, while the £12,000 was an issue for the people in WAVE, it was not for many more. They asked why no one was speaking for them in that debate. This is the sad reality. In some ways, the report went to ground and should have been back on the table much sooner.