Debate contribution: Special Educational Needs and Disability: Investment and Transformation
Debate contribution by Mr Gerry Carroll on .
- MLA
- Mr Gerry Carroll
- Party at the time
- People Before Profit Alliance
- Date
- 26 February 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Special Educational Needs and Disability: Investment and Transformation
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4231297
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Just three weeks: that is how long it took for the families of children with special educational needs and disabilities to protest outside the newly restored Assembly. Along with other Members, I was with Colin autism group today. I also stood alongside and in support of Unite the union members. I commend them both for taking a stand for all those affected by our broken education system. Politicians and sections of the media have tried to pit those people against one another in the past, and they are not falling for it. The Executive parties here should be ashamed for failing our most vulnerable children, putting countless families through the wringer and treating education workers with absolute contempt. Almost every day, I speak to parents who have to go through the torture of navigating the pitfalls in the SEND sector: being unable to have their child assessed; being unable to get a statement of need; or even being unable to get a school place. Last year, we had the appalling situation where hundreds of children with special educational needs and disabilities and their families were left in limbo, not knowing where they would go when September came around. Unfortunately, officials have warned me and my party that there will likely be a repeat of that unforgivable situation this year. That is not to mention, of course, the impact on and constant disruption of the education of vulnerable children in schools that are under-resourced, understaffed and, seemingly, uncared for by the Stormont Executive. It is as simple as this: the state is failing to meet its legal and statutory obligations to children with special educational needs and disabilities. It is denying them their right to a full and fruitful education and stymieing their potential. If that is not discrimination, I do not know what is. Families should not have to persevere, but persevere they have. I pay tribute to all those who have campaigned and taken the fight to those in power to demand investment in the SEND sector. Not only have they helped to pick up the pieces when the state has failed but they have been absolutely determined to ensure that the farce does not continue. I also want to mention all the education workers who have taken to picket lines to strike for a pay and grading review and for investment in reform — proper reform — of the SEND sector. I submitted an amendment to today's motion in support of those workers. It was not selected for debate, unfortunately, but I will summarise it here. It commended the efforts of the education workers in the SEND sector who go above and beyond for the vulnerable children they care for and educate. It asked the Assembly to recognise the incredibly difficult circumstances that they work in daily and noted that declining real-terms pay has compounded the recruitment and retention crisis facing the sector. It asked the Assembly to recognise that education support staff have not had their right to a 52-week contract honoured and further commended the education workers who took strike action in pursuit of investment in our children's education. Finally, it asked the Assembly to commit to meeting the pay and grading demands of those workers, which brings us to the nub of the matter. The refusal of the new Executive to undertake the pay and grading review demanded by workers and families reminds us that the failures that we speak of are not just historical; they are current. Three weeks in, families and trade unions are knocking at the door of the new Executive, because they have immediately continued down the path of their blundering predecessors. The pay and grading review has been outstanding since 2019. The Executive parties, which include the Members who tabled the motion and those who will endorse it, are, at this moment, refusing to invest properly in those workers and the SEND sector. It is utter hypocrisy, and it should tell those outside where the Government's priorities lie. Finally, I will read out some demands that have been sent to me by constituents. They are calling for equity in education; timely, early intervention; accountability for the Education Authority; and proper reform that involves the voices of parents and workers. The time for lip service is over. Children with special educational needs and disabilities demand investment in their education. They demand action, and that is the very least that they deserve.
740 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.05 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.92).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.79).
- Subject area: Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits.
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.06 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.04 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.92 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.05 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.79 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.20 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 1.00 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:43 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.