Debate contribution: School Uniforms: Affordability

Debate contribution by Ms Cheryl Brownlee on .

MLA
Ms Cheryl Brownlee
Party at the time
Democratic Unionist Party
Date
5 March 2024
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Private Members' Business
Heading
School Uniforms: Affordability
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4252526

Read the official Assembly record

Text

As a parent whose daughter started secondary school in September, I know all too well the significant costs that are associated with purchasing school uniforms. I am delighted to see the motion and the amendment, as we should address this burden as soon as possible. The cost of uniforms can be extortionate to the point of being simply unaffordable. That is only compounded for families with multiple children. No parent should be excluded owing to the cost of a school uniform. I agree, of course, that financial support for those in low-income households should be supported, continued and protected, but I will also highlight the plight of working families. Owing to the strict criteria and threshold, working families are continually excluded from government support. They, too, have been hit extremely hard by the cost-of-living crisis. They continue to receive no support with childcare, housing, rates, the cost of living, uniforms or lunches, yet they are seeing their costs continually rise, leaving them literally on the breadline. We need to ensure that everyone across society is supported. We have previously urged Westminster to recognise the extortionate price of uniforms and to extend the zero rate or else introduce a price cap to support families and children in Northern Ireland. We will continue to do that. Significant work has been done by local councils and the community, voluntary and faith sectors to tackle the issue head-on. In my constituency, Mid and East Antrim Borough Council's community planning partnership has teamed up with community advice services to help provide parents with good-quality, clean, pre-worn school uniforms at no cost. A uniform pop-up shop was opened in Carrickfergus town centre during the summer, and a number of community groups and charities offered support and assistance. We must, however, be realistic and recognise the societal pressures on young people and the demand that those place on their parents. Children are under pressure to have the top brands and to keep up to date with the latest trends, and the unfortunate truth is that parents are forced into financial stress, taking out loans and using moneylenders as a result of that constant demand. There needs to be societal change in order to reduce the stigma associated with second-hand clothes or clothes swaps. Achieving that will not only reduce the financial burden but be far better for our environment. I believe that societal views on the subject are changing significantly. I have to confess that I am a lover of Vinted, where one can buy and sell second-hand clothes. Doing that is becoming more and more popular, and the stigma that was once there is no longer as prevalent. That needs to continue, and we all have a part to play, but it is by no means a solution. The real issue is that, in Northern Ireland, there is no legislation to address school uniform costs and the associated criteria. It falls to our schools to manage that day-to-day. At the moment, guidance to boards of governors encourages them to take account of affordability, but that guidance is not enshrined in law and therefore leads to inconsistencies across the board. The permanent secretary wrote to all schools in June 2023, encouraging them to take account of the guidance and of the impact on families of expensive uniform requirements, but, again, it is merely guidance. I also acknowledge that schools and their boards of governors wish to present their school to the highest possible visual standard and that flexibility around uniforms can mean a degree of uncertainty, but the reality is that the strict demands placed on parents are driving them to breaking point, placing wholly unnecessary stipulations on them and putting looks over education. There are small changes that can be made to help address the issues presented today. It is critical that schools do not instruct parents to buy from one specific supplier or buy a certain brand, thereby giving those suppliers a monopoly of the market, given the sky-high costs that come with that. We should ensure that items are available off the peg from a number of retail outlets so that a school uniform does not become a barrier to children from low-income families. We should also reduce the number of compulsory items. Pupils should not feel stigmatised because they cannot afford the sometimes huge array of uniform and sportswear items demanded by some schools, and cost should not be a prohibitive factor in deciding which school a child attends. The aims of a school uniform are to bring the school community together and to help create a sense of belonging and cohesion for pupils. When accessibility to that uniform starts to create a barrier and exclude pupils, we need to make that change.

790 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

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: 0.03 (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 (0.96).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
  • 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

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.04No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.01No
Dog-whistle messaging0.02No
Controversy escalation0.03No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.96Yes
Overall judgement0.03At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)1.00
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
No identity-related subject0.62
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups0.12
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues0.11
Education structures, integration and community division0.11
Another identity-related subject0.03

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:46 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