Debate contribution: School Uniforms (Trousers) Bill: Second Stage

Debate contribution by Ms Claire Sugden on 30 June 2026.

MLA

Ms Claire Sugden

Party at the time

Independent

Date

30 June 2026

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Committee Business

Heading

School Uniforms (Trousers) Bill: Second Stage

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5653706

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I am very happy to support the Bill at Second Stage. Last Friday, I visited a local school where girls already have the option of wearing trousers as part of their school uniform. During that discussion with primary-school pupils, I mentioned the fact that the Assembly would soon debate the School Uniforms (Trousers) Bill and the right for girls to wear trousers. As I said that, many of them looked genuinely puzzled: they simply could not understand why that was something that required law; it should be a fundamental part of what already happens. In many ways, our young people are ahead of us. To them, this is not controversial; it is simply a common-sense issue. Unfortunately, their experience is not one that exists everywhere. The reality is that the right for a girl to wear trousers to school still depends on the school that she attends. It depends on the school's uniform policy and decisions that have been taken by individual boards of governors. I will address some points that have been made in relation to that. Matters of equality should not be the decision of a board of governors but an overarching decision of the Executive and the Assembly. It is disappointing that the Education Minister did not take that decision himself.

I therefore absolutely commend the Committee for filling that equality gap, because it is important that the Assembly demonstrate what is important to our society. While there is a practical reason behind the legislation, we have to come back to equality, and a society that has equality is certainly a society in which I wish to live. Different schools have different policies, meaning that two girls living on the same street but attending different schools will have different choices. More than that, it means that girls have a different choice from boys. Fundamentally, that is what we are trying to say here. As others have said, I had hoped that the matter would be addressed in the previous school uniforms legislation. Indeed, I tabled an amendment to that Bill to achieve the desired outcome, but, sadly, the opportunity was not taken. One of the strengths of the Assembly is that Committees can identify where Executive legislation has fallen short and produce their own practical, targeted solutions. That is what has happened here, so I commend the Committee for taking the initiative. I became involved with the issue not because I was looking at school uniform policy per se but because a young girl — a primary-school child — asked to meet me to discuss it specifically. She explained to me that she and her friends wanted the option of wearing trousers, because that was not possible at the school that they attended. They were concerned about upskirting: primary-school children approached their local MLA to talk about upskirting. I remember leaving that meeting desperately sad and disappointed that that was what they were asking me, not least as the mother of a girl who will grow up in this society. Here we have primary-school girls already thinking about how they need to protect themselves from the behaviour of others. We have to be absolutely clear that the responsibility for upskirting lies entirely with those who do it. Girls should never have to change their behaviour because of the actions of others. We must continue to challenge that behaviour wherever it exists, and the Assembly needs to look at that acutely as soon as possible and certainly in the next mandate. We should listen when young people tell us about the reality of their lives. That meeting was a reminder that issues that can appear small to adults — there have been adults who have asked why the Assembly is legislating on this — can be issues on which we need to legislate. When people do not behave appropriately, we as a legislature have a responsibility to legislate. When children are telling us of their experiences, as happened with me, we absolutely should listen to them. As other Members have said, girls are speaking about having dignity during their periods. They are speaking about their comfort. As a child walking to and from school, I recall getting my PE kit out. I used to hitch the shorts on and then throw off the skirt, because I was desperately uncomfortable wearing a skirt. That was to be able to walk home, which was about a mile down the road. That is, gosh, almost 35 years ago, yet we are still having the conversation in 2026. If I were to speak to that eight-year-old girl, I would tell her, "When you are 40, Claire, this will not even be a consideration for you". Sadly, however, it still is. It is deeply disappointing that, when we had an opportunity, it was not taken. Where a leader in our Government had an opportunity to allow girls to wear trousers to school, he did not do so. That is something on which we should all reflect. Other Members spoke about the warmth that trousers provide during the winter months, and I absolutely agree. Points were made about participating in outdoor learning and practical activities, and I really take the point about being stung by nettles. Why is it that girls have to do hopscotch on grass because they are wearing a skirt? That is ridiculous. The point that we should all pay attention to is that of girls feeling less exposed. We should focus on that even if there were no other reasons to pass the legislation. Girls simply want to get on with their school day without having to think about something that most boys take for granted. Boys do not have to think about it because they are able to wear trousers. None of the reasons given for girls wanting to wear trousers to school is unreasonable. None of them should have to be justified at all, because it is not about fashion, about ethos or about abandoning school uniforms. For many reasons, I agree with the principle of having school uniforms. The young people who engaged in the debate in Committee were not even asking to opt out of wearing a uniform. If anything, they were asking to be treated equally in wearing the uniform. That is an important distinction. We often talk in the Chamber about listening to young people and making policy with them rather than for them. On this issue, they have spoken clearly. Young people have explained why it matters to them and how it will affect them.

Frankly, we should be listening. Sometimes, we talk about equality in broad terms, but the Bill reminds us that equality is often about practical things. It is about removing unnecessary barriers from everyday life and ensuring that opportunities and choices do not depend on arbitrary differences between schools. No pupil should have to seek permission to wear trousers. No pupil should have to rely on the goodwill of an individual school to be able to access something that should be available, consistently, across Northern Ireland. The Bill provides that consistency. It is practical and proportionate, and it reflects the views of many young people who will be affected by it. Perhaps most importantly, it brings us into line with what many schools have already recognised as common sense and equality. For those reasons, I am pleased to support the Bill. I look forward to its various stages. Hopefully, it will become an Act.

1,245 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 16:12 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.

Challenge this classification