Debate contribution: Relationships and Sexuality Education

Debate contribution by Mr Gerry Carroll on 22 April 2024.

MLA

Mr Gerry Carroll

Party at the time

People Before Profit Alliance

Date

22 April 2024

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Relationships and Sexuality Education

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4484897

Read the official Assembly record

Text

We cannot allow social, political and religious conservatism to be a barrier to our children's education. There should be nothing controversial about providing comprehensive, age-appropriate and evidence-based education on sexual and reproductive heath. It is not enough to say that changes to RSE are well overdue, although they are, but rather that the failure to bring them forward is a risk to young people's health, safety and overall well-being. Our education system falls far short on all sorts of issues, including on sexual orientation, reproductive health, consent and gender identity, and that is not good enough. It does not take much extrapolation to figure out the harm that the system can cause to young people grappling with relationships, sexual or reproductive health, pregnancy, their gender identity or their sexuality. Those who would deny children proper RSE are not only putting them at risk but, as our friends at the Office of the Children's Commissioner remind us, infringing on their right to:

"an education, to health, to protection from violence and abuse, to survival and development, to identity, to non-discrimination and equality, and to the freedom of thought and belief."

Many who oppose age-appropriate, scientifically accurate RSE claim that they want to protect children with their conservative agenda. How, then, do they justify the fact that 62% of young people resort to asking friends for information and that 55% use social media to find information on sex and relationships? As Alliance for Choice highlights, the scope for misinformation, as well as for harmful narratives and stereotypes around misogyny, coercive control, body image and heteronormativity, is profound. The implicit damage to the health and well-being of young people from that approach should be obvious to everyone. It should also be obvious as to who is leading the charge against making the necessary changes to RSE. The politicians in particular should be familiar to us. They are the same politicians from parties that have denied the rights of the LGBT+ community and resisted the democratic demand for equal marriage; that deny women and pregnant people the right to choose; and that are currently denying trans people the right to gender-reaffirming surgery and healthcare. It should be no surprise to anyone that the DUP wants to infringe on the rights of the marginalised and to roll back the hard-won right to reproductive healthcare, amongst other things. There may be parents out there who are genuinely moved by this issue and are acting in what they perceive to be their child's interest. They are being deliberately misled. There is a lot of talk about coded language. Yes, the far right is using RSE as a dog whistle. It is using it to bring together a regressive alliance of anti-choice activists, anti-LGBTQ bigots and conservative fundamentalists. Shame on the Upper Bann Member for his dog-whistle approach, not just today but in leading protests against the issue. Why does he not try leading protests against the underfunding of the health service, the underfunding of the education system or any other issue? There are those who yearn for a return to the conservative and reactionary climate, North and South, where the rights of the LGBT community, women and children are up for debate. We will not be dragged backwards. We will not allow the right — the right — to use this issue to infringe on the rights of everyone and anyone. I support the motion and urge the Education Minister to get on with the job of providing, and funding, age-appropriate, evidence-based RSE.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Second assessment

Jev’s answers did not settle this record, so a second model, claude-opus-5-5, read the same text (without the MLA’s name or party) and gave its reasons on 21 October 2026. How the second assessment works

Verdict

Not flagged

Public interest or divisiveness

Mixed

Against the published rubric

The speech makes a substantive case for 'comprehensive, age-appropriate and evidence-based' RSE. It cites children's rights, survey figures on where young people get information, and health risks, and it ends by urging the Education Minister to provide and fund the programme. It also carries a strong attacking element: it describes opponents as a 'regressive alliance of anti-choice activists, anti-LGBTQ bigots and conservative fundamentalists', links them to 'the far right', says concerned parents are 'being deliberately misled' and shames a named member. That edges towards labelling religious and conservative opponents as bigots. Most of the criticism of the party is tied to its record and policy positions rather than to a community as a whole.

Public interest or divisiveness

The core of the contribution deals with a real policy gap and its effects on young people's health, safety and rights, and it presses the department to act, which serves the public interest. Alongside that, a substantial share of the speech is partisan and ideological point-scoring that casts opponents of the motion as a reactionary, bigoted bloc. This deepens the culture-war framing of RSE rather than persuading anyone. Both elements are significant.

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:01 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