Debate contribution: Education Inspections Bill: Second Stage
Debate contribution by Mr Nick Mathison on .
- MLA
- Mr Nick Mathison
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 1 June 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Executive Committee Business
- Heading
- Education Inspections Bill: Second Stage
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5581483
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Member for his intervention. I used the word "hope" because I am not here as a spokesperson for any of the trade unions, so I cannot speak for them. I know that the teachers whom I have spoken to feel that the clause would be so profoundly damaging to their relationship with the Department that, it seems to me, it could only be a negative intervention at this time. When we legislate, timing is important. I know that teachers are concerned about the Bill passing Second Stage, largely because of that clause; in fact, they are concerned only because of that clause. Let me be crystal clear, however: the clause can be amended, but, if an amendment cannot be found to resolve the issues satisfactorily or ends up not being selected for debate at Consideration Stage, the clause can be voted down. I do not know how to be clearer than that. I have questions about the position that is being taken on voting down the Bill. To me, that does not seem to be the approach that we normally take at Second Stage, particularly when it is an Executive Bill that was agreed to at Executive level. I accept that, often, there will be elements in a Bill that everyone can broadly support and elements that some cannot support. The Committee is the place in which to iron out issues, however, and the amending stages are when we can do the work to remove the bits of the Bill that Members do not like. I notice that Danny is shaking his head, but can he articulate clearly for me why he believes that we cannot vote against a clause at Consideration Stage? Is it his position that we cannot vote against a clause at Consideration Stage?
OK. I am happy to take an intervention.
I have no concerns about Alliance's track record of supporting teachers. We need to be clear, however. We can make big statements. The Bill is not all about sanctioning teachers. The Bill does three things, one of which is to sanction teachers. The second is to reform RE inspection, while the third is to widen the ETI's remit to other institutions. The Bill therefore does three things. I would hope that, as legislators, we would have the capacity to manage to hold those things in tension, and, if there is an element that we do not like, we deal with it at Committee Stage. It does not matter how many times you say that you cannot do that or that you do not trust the Minister, because every Member has the opportunity to force a Division on a clause at Consideration Stage. That is a point of fact.
I thank the Member for his intervention. That is for Sinn Féin to answer, not me. I cannot speak for that party. There is an issue. We need to be careful not to spread any kind of misinformation among teachers. Teachers are genuinely and rightly concerned about the content of the Bill; of course they are. Every Member in the Chamber has been contacted by teachers, but there are other ways to deal with the issue rather than voting the whole Bill down. As I said, Alliance has a strong track record of supporting teachers and challenging the Minister on the workload pressures faced by the teaching profession. If the Bill passes its Second Stage today, Alliance's position will not have changed one iota. We stand in full support of teachers, and we will ensure that the work is done to get the Bill to an acceptable state. The Minister has already indicated that he is prepared to engage with the Committee on the clause that is causing concern, and I hope that his offer has been made in good faith. We will be ready for that engagement, should it be made available. Alliance clearly wants RE to be inspected, and, at the same time, we want to address the serious concerns with clause 3. Surely it is within the gift of the Assembly to do those two things. Surely we can achieve that. Every MLA in the Chamber knows that the legislative process that is available to us allows us to do those two things at the same time. We will support the Bill's Second Stage. Alliance is crystal clear that the current proposals in the Bill on the sanctioning of teachers are not acceptable, and we will oppose them as the Bill progresses. Let us see how we can improve the Bill, however. Let us do the scrutiny work and reassure teachers that the clause that is causing them concern can be dealt with. Anyone who is telling them otherwise is not being honest.
Finally, when it comes to safeguarding, which the Minister raised in substantial detail, I want to be clear that I do not consider that opposing clause 3 or seeking to amend it in any way represents a light-touch approach to safeguarding. If we want to avoid any disruption to inspection, clearly the Minister should seek, if at all possible, agreement with the trade unions that they will not include ETI in any action short of strike that might emerge in the future. I sincerely hope that we can avoid action short of strike because it is not good for our school system. I urge and encourage the Minister to seek that agreement with the trade unions, which would provide assurance and protection for everyone.
I will give way briefly.
921 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.