Debate contribution: Independent Review of Education

Debate contribution by Mr Paul Givan on 21 October 2024.

MLA

Mr Paul Givan

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist Party

Date

21 October 2024

Type

Debate contribution (made as a minister)

Business

Ministerial Statement

Heading

Independent Review of Education

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4603494

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I welcome Mr O'Toole's support for some of the recommendations that have been highlighted in the statement. That is important. The independent review touches on the Education Authority in comments and proposals in relation to that issue. It also reported its findings that the controlled sector is not getting the support that it needs. That proposal is evidence-based, and the independent review of education speaks to that particular issue. The EA was also subject to a landscape review, which drew attention to "significant failings" and identified improvements that need to be made. My proposal in establishing a task force, which is now meeting and will report at the end of the year, is very much in line with the evidence that was highlighted, both by the landscape review and through the independent review of education, that documents failings that exist in that organisation, particularly in relation to the controlled sector.

The Chairman acknowledges that a lot of these recommendations are worthy of support, and I look forward to engaging with him and the Committee as we take forward the measures that I have announced today. Obviously, the independent review touches on the transfer process. It recognises the political contention that has surrounded that issue for many years. The transfer test is not the most important part of our education system, yet it has attracted the most political debate. I am interested in making progress in areas where we can achieve political consensus rather than continuing to talk about an issue where it has been shown that there has been contention for many years. That is why the focus is on the measures that I have outlined today that I want to take forward around the curriculum and supporting that review to make sure that what is being taught in every school matters. How we support teachers in every school matters, rather than going round in circles on the particular issue of the transfer test.

I have attended the Education Committee more than Conor Murphy has attended the Economy Committee.

I have attended the Education Committee twice as many times as one of your own Ministers has attended his Department's Committee. I have attended the Committee more than the leader of the Alliance Party has attended her Department's Committee. I am quite happy to attend the Committee. I am sure that we will be able to find a space in the diary where we can accommodate that. I realise that the Committee is very busy dealing with its inquiry into relationships and sexuality education and has had a lengthy consultation period now extended. Whilst its priority is on a very niche area that principals actually do not raise with me as an area of concern, I would love the Committee to get involved in special educational needs in much more detail. I would like it to get more focused on the curriculum, qualifications and supporting our workforce rather than pursuing the Alliance Party's pet project around sex education. I will be happy to engage with the Committee on these issues. The transformation of special educational needs is absolutely critical. That is why I announced a change in how we approach capital spend for special schools. All 39 are being assessed as to how we can enhance that provision. That is why my focus was on establishing 1,450 placements for children who require additional support. We achieved that, and those placements are being filled. That was the day-1 pressure that I had to take up, so I very much welcome a renewed focus on the Education Committee wanting to support me in those areas, and I look forward to engaging with it on them.

Do not take my word for it; the independent review of education indicated very clearly that we are not properly funded. Indeed, the per pupil spend in Northern Ireland is not equivalent to that of England. Addressing the financial deficit will be a real challenge for the Executive. I have advocated on many occasions for the additional financial resources that we need. We successfully resolved industrial action, but that has a resource consequential that needs to be met. That is not just a challenge for the Executive. I recognise that every Department has pressures. We need to have a proper financial settlement from Westminster. We have identified the fiscal needs that exist, and we need to have those met. That will assist every Department, but Education in particular has been underfunded for many years. If we are going to invest in the future, we need to invest in the Department of Education.

The Member speaks to the wider issue of how we support children and young people aged 16 to 18, including those with additional needs. Of course, we have to support young people until the age of 18 to 19 in special schools, but there are concerns about the transition period when they move from Education to other Departments, including the Department of Health. It is vital that that transition is addressed, and work streams are taking place to try to address the concerns. Members have highlighted, as an area of concern, how we can support young people, particularly those with additional needs, with the transition years.

The Member brings me to an important area. It is one of the key measures that, as I have highlighted, we need to address in the rest of this mandate: educational underachievement. 'A Fair Start' highlighted a number of areas where support is needed. The funding that we have secured to take forward the RAISE programme will be very important in addressing educational underachievement. That requires a whole-community response. We have appointed the area coordinators in each of the areas, and people are being invited to workshops to design that response. As they design that whole-community response, decisions will be taken on funding. No decisions have been made yet on what should be funded in respect of the RAISE programme, because we are designing the particular projects that will be supported in the areas where it plans to operate.

I refer the Member to a previous question from Mr Baker about appearing before the Committee. I have made the point —

I am glad the Member is actually here, because he has spent more time sniping when I have not been in the Chamber. At least, now, he is doing it in front of me. It is of no surprise that that is how the Member conducts himself. When it comes the issues that he raised around how we engage across the Executive, he is right. This will require other Departments to respond. I am outlining my Department's response to these issues, but others will also need to respond. Some recommendations sit exclusively outside my Department and are for other Ministers — the Minister for the Economy is one of those. On how we meet the needs of young people aged from 16 to 18, obviously, we have the formal settings of sixth forms in schools, but we also have higher educational colleges. Creating the pathways will be important. If you look at how this was taken forward in England, you will see that 20 hours were required in addition to employment. That can be met through apprenticeships and traineeships and in educational settings. We need to take forward the legislation first. That will require Executive agreement, and all Ministers will have to engage in that process. Then, we will need to find a way to give effect to and implement that. When the legislation in England was introduced, it gave a very clear focus to Departments to collaborate. It gave a priority in law that education is important. This sends out a powerful message that the Assembly and Executive recognise how critical it is for 16-, 17- and 18-year-olds to be engaged in training. There are consequences of not staying in education. Whilst 85% of 16- to-18-year-olds stay on in some form of education or training, a minority do not, and, typically, they come from more socially deprived backgrounds. Therefore, their opportunity to develop and their economic potential as they get older are greatly disadvantaged. That is why taking forward the steps that were announced today is very important.

I have laid out in more detail the scope of the terms of reference for the curriculum review that Lucy Crehan will take forward. Time will be needed for that, but the time frame is for a report to be provided in the spring of next year. I have highlighted key areas around literacy and numeracy that I would like immediate focus on. The curriculum review is important. I know that Ms Nicholl is no longer on the Committee. I will miss her being there. We worked closely on the childcare strategy, the delivery of which was important. I take assurance from the Member that the Education Committee wants to move on to broader issues, having announced as its first priority an inquiry into relationships and sexuality education (RSE). It could have announced that its first inquiry would be on the curriculum or special educational needs: it did not. It chose to focus on an area that principals do not raise with me, and it did so because of an agenda that the Alliance Party wants to pursue. It is a welcome development that the Education Committee and the Alliance Party want to move away from that issue and get into substantive issues that impact on the most important people in our society.

I will take the last point first. The number impacted is about 15%. Of Northern Ireland's school-leavers, 85% entered higher or further education post 16, and about 11% commenced employment. The proposal will promote the value of education. Other jurisdictions have adopted a similar approach. It is vital that we take that step. It will take a number of years to give effect to it, but, as Education Minister, I support the principle behind the recommendation. I will take legislative proposals to my Executive colleagues, and we will then need to implement them. When it was introduced in England 10 years ago, a positive impact was shown in the reduction in the number of post-16 school-leavers who did not engage in formal education or training. That is important. People often talk about "NEETs" — those who are not in education, employment or training — and efforts are made to address the issue of NEETs, but giving effect to the legislation will really focus Departments on their legal requirements to get into the issue in a better way than we have done.

That is a really good question. The Executive can point to the early years strategy that we are taking forward as something that, collectively, we have worked on well together. The Finance Minister very much supported the proposals that I brought to the Executive. We have been rolling out the childcare subsidy scheme, which is a £25 million programme that we are developing as the next stage in the process of supporting the early years sector. When it comes to the overall strategy that we need to develop, I hope that, around the spring of 2025, we will announce a draft strategy that will cover a lot of the issues, including how we can support the workforce in those early years settings.

As part of the process, Lucy Crehan's review will have to engage with all the key stakeholders. It is not intended to be a lengthy or protracted piece of work. The independent review was a two-year process and is a strong evidence base for the recommendations. As the curriculum review is taken forward, there will, of course, l be stakeholder engagement. Yes, what the revised curriculum looks like across Northern Ireland will, ultimately, come back to the Department, and the earlier phase is about literacy and numeracy. Yes, it will come back to me as the Minister for final sign-off.

The Member highlights, as I laboured in the statement, the point that we will be only as good as the excellent teachers whom we have. We need to invest in our teachers. We need to be able to recruit the best people into the profession, and we need to retain people in the profession. We will do that only with the right terms and conditions. That is why I was pleased to have a very early engagement with the unions. We resolved the industrial action. We had a double-figure percentage increase in pay, and action short of strike ended. What is important is that we see the outworkings of that process. We need to stand up the assessment processes in schools, so what we can measure what we do, which will inform any changes that we need to make. That is important. Pay parity is important. We know that, in England, there has been a 5·5% increase in teachers' pay. I want to take that forward in our discussions with the unions, but, of course, how we work through the various public-sector pay processes that we need to come to decisions on this year is a wider matter for the Northern Ireland Executive. I very much recognise that society has to show the value that we place on the teaching profession and on our support staff, who will start on their new terms and conditions in November. Again, that successfully resolved the industrial action that had been disruptive to the education of our young people.

This shows the powerful impact that the Member's contribution had on me at the Committee: within a week of asking for a response, she got it. I like to respond to Members as effectively and efficiently as possible, and I am sure that that will continue to be the case. The transformation of special educational needs is hugely important. There were 200 recommendations in the end-to-end review, and I am pulling together a delivery plan, because we need to identify not just the issues but the solutions and how we put actions in place. I hope that, in the not-too-distant future, we will have an effective delivery plan to take forward the changes that we need in special educational needs provision. It touches on the matter that the Member raised about placement and the timeliness of placement. We do not want to be faced with the situation that we have had for two years in a row of still trying, coming into September, to get children and young people into a school. We need to make sure that it is the right school, but it has to be provided at the right time as well.

I agree with the Member. That is why I provided advice around RSE. That is why my Department is very much part of the Executive-agreed strategy for ending violence against women and girls. The strategy provides clear recommendations for my Department, and I will very much take those forward. The Member raises the issue of collaboration. The report speaks to the need for much better collaboration on what the pathways for 16- to 18-year-olds will look like. When it comes to careers advice, you have careers advice in schools, and then you have the Careers Service in the Department for the Economy. I met Minister Murphy about this. We have a 14-19 framework when it comes to careers advice. We hope to make progress on the issue to ensure that there is that collaboration. The Member is right. Education has many different parts that are not meant to be in competition with one another, whatever the sector is. We have many sectors in education: Irish medium, controlled, Catholic maintained and integrated. They are not to sit in competition with one another: they are to collaborate with one another. I believe in an inclusive education system, but I also believe in choice. That is a fundamental human right that is underpinned by the European Convention on Human Rights. However, that should not mean they are competing in the education system; it ought to mean that they work in collaboration. A school should reflect the community that is around it. If there are barriers to attracting individuals to a school, how is the school working to address those barriers? I very much support the tenet of the Member's question on the need for much greater collaboration, which is necessary.

I have spoken about the curriculum review on a couple of occasions. Work started today. I have announced publicly who will take that forward for me. The report will come to me in due course, and then we will see the outworkings of the review. It is absolutely vital that we look at how the curriculum is delivered as children and young people progress through education. If you have a rich, knowledge-based understanding of a subject matter, you grow in confidence and develop skills that you can then utilise to put into effect, in a practical sense, the outworkings of that knowledge. You develop those skills through a knowledge-based approach. That is where the curriculum review will help. It will assess our current curriculum and what changes we need to make to it.

I touched on that issue briefly. My Department and the Department for the Economy are working on the 14-19 framework. I met Minister Murphy about that. Our officials are engaging and are finalising an updated framework. That is to make sure that the careers advice that is being provided in schools and colleges aligns and that it aligns with the needs of the wider business community and with what our economy needs from the young people who are coming forward. It is about giving that advice at the right time. It is important that that advice is provided as early as possible, because young people pick their GCSE subjects in year 11 on the basis of conversations that they have already had with family and friends about the kind of job that they want. The provision of careers advice at 17 is too late for many young people, given that they will have already chosen their subjects. We therefore need to provide that advice as early as possible, but it needs to be aligned between the two Departments and with the needs of our economy as a whole.

The evidence around why we need to move on that issue is very clear. For a small minority, there is a disproportionate impact on economic outlook in life and potential if we do not provide greater training and support to them. I have covered that point in previous answers on why we are changing the age limit.

That is an important question. The independent review talks in detail about what a sustainable school looks like and what kind of offering it should make. In Northern Ireland, the development proposal (DP) process for how we consider the way in which schools can increase their enrolment or which schools should open, close or transform can be quite bureaucratic and often takes a long time. A task force will be established to look at area planning and the DP process in particular to see how we can better align the decisions that we take on how we meet the educational needs in communities.

Classroom assistants play an important role; absolutely. That is why I engaged with the unions, successfully resolved industrial action and secured a pay rise for classroom assistants and other support staff. I gave priority to addressing the issue. I did not wait until today's announcement of the review to get on with the job for the past eight months; I have been getting on with the job. Pay scales will be put in place in November and payments will be made to classroom assistants, because they are vital in our education system. I pay tribute to them, but it would be remiss not to explore how we can improve the model of support for children on the basis of a child-centred approach that considers the individual needs of the child. I do not envisage the removal of classroom assistants. I agree with the panel's view that classroom assistants play a vital role in supporting learners and teachers but that a blanket use of classroom assistants can be inappropriate. Interventions and support should be needs-based and focused on the individual learner. That is an area where we need to make sure how best to support our children and young people, but I absolutely agree that classroom assistants play an important role, and I put on record my appreciation and thanks to them for the job that they do.

Perhaps the Member did not hear the responses to questions on the statement or chooses to ignore them. I engaged with the trade unions. As a socialist, he should thank me for what I was able to do with them. I met them. I sat down with them and talked through the issues. We resolved industrial action. I achieved a double-figure percentage pay rise for teachers. I am sure that Mr Carroll will put out a statement commending me for that. I resolved industrial action for our classroom assistants. Their new terms and conditions start in November. Perhaps the Member did not hear that, but hopefully he has heard the message today. I champion and support our teaching profession and our classroom assistants. That is why I have achieved real increases in their pay.

I thank the Member for raising that, because it is a genuine concern for families. I have met a number of families who are concerned about that cliff edge. It is absolutely important that the right support is provided at the right time for children and young people, and various Departments have legal responsibilities in that regard. The solution should not be that simply because people are concerned that the Department of Health cannot meet the need, the Department of Education has to meet the need. Whichever Department is legally responsible should meet the need. As things are prescribed in law, we have a legal responsibility until the age of 19, and, then, other Departments have a legal responsibility. We are involved in that transition process. If Members and families are saying that they do not have confidence in the Department of Health and others, but that they do have confidence in the Department of Education, we need to ask this hard question: why are they not getting the support from the Departments that, under the law, should be providing them with the support? It is an important point, because it is real for the families concerned. I absolutely believe that the right transition process is needed, but simply putting up, as the solution, that the Department of Education becomes legally responsible until the age of 25 needs to be explored. We need to ask why we do not have confidence in the current system and why we would campaign for that change.

I appreciate the Member raising the issue. The independent review highlights the real challenges that the EA has, structurally, as an organisation. I know that when Members receive a call from the principal of a school, they are frustrated to hear about the length of time that it can often take for the EA to do what it needs to do when it comes to maintenance programmes and taking forward feasibility studies for enhancement schemes. Furthermore, the EA has a unique and distinct role for controlled schools. The Catholic maintained sector has its Council for Catholic Maintained Schools (CCMS). That does not exist for the controlled sector; it has the EA. The EA provides services to all schools, but it has a distinct role as the managing authority when it comes to area planning for controlled schools, which does not exist for other sectors. There is an evidence base that highlights why there is a challenge and problem with that arrangement. Let us allow the task force that has been set up to produce its report. I have challenged it to do that by the end of this year. Its work will include looking at what interim steps the EA could make to address the concerns as we move towards trying to establish a managing authority for controlled schools. The premise of taking this forward is evidence-based, but also grounded in equality. I hope that we do not get to the point where Members will say, "It's OK for the Catholic maintained sector to have its managing authority, but we're not going to let the controlled sector do it". People would see through that argument.

4,093 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:23 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