Debate contribution: Special Educational Needs: Crisis in Provision

Debate contribution by Mr Mark Durkan on .

MLA
Mr Mark Durkan
Party at the time
Social Democratic and Labour Party
Date
8 September 2025
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Private Members' Business
Heading
Special Educational Needs: Crisis in Provision
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5068836

Read the official Assembly record

Text

The new start that September brings should be a month of promise, maybe not for the Assembly but for the children who are starting a new school or a new school year. For most families, it brings hope and excitement, but, for too many parents of children with special educational needs, it brings only anxiety and exhaustion. That is the exhaustion of a parent who has had to fight every day just for their child's most basic right: an education. It is unacceptable that any family should be left in limbo, not knowing where their child will be come September. We need the clarity that the motion seeks on the number of pupils who have been impacted, because an allocated place on paper means little if a child cannot physically attend. Families deserve certainty, not crisis management year after year. We also know that demand is only increasing. The EA estimates that, by next year, an additional 1,000 SEN places will be required. Minister, what work is happening now to ensure that those places are available so that we are not back here in 12 months, facing even more chaos and distress for even more families? Inclusion must be more than a slogan. SEN cannot be seen as just an add-on; it must be embedded as a standard across all schools. We also need to recognise the wider impact on teachers and school leaders. Burnout levels are soaring, and the unions have been clear that the lack of SEN support contributes to unmanageable workloads and staff leaving the profession. Our classroom assistants and SEN staff are the backbone of our education system, yet they have been consistently undervalued and let down. Despite their passion and vocation, many have been forced out of posts that they love. Too often, I have heard about and from dedicated staff who are leaving to stack shelves in supermarkets because they can earn more money with less stress and greater job security. That is a damning indictment of how the system treats those who give so much to our children and, by extension, how it treats our children. Families feel unheard and unsupported. They have told us that year after year. The independent autism reviewer, Ema Cubitt, has warned that "trust has been eroded" through:

"years of crisis management [and] short-term fixes".

Too many parents feel blamed for school avoidance when, in truth, their children's needs have often simply not been met. I recently spoke to a mother — many of us will have many similar stories — who told me that, from the very start of her son's education, she knew that he needed extra help. Yet the diagnosis that, she knew, he needed did not come until he was practically finished primary school. At every turn, there was a hurdle, such as waiting lists and delayed assessments, and, while the system stalled, her son lost years of required additional support. When a placement was secured, it was simply a stopgap. He was placed in a class not because it was the best option but because it was the only option. We have seen that story on repeat: parents fighting the system and burning out while children pay the price, only to face another cliff edge, as others have mentioned, when the child reaches the age of 19. The Commissioner for Children and Young People (NICCY) could not have put it more plainly in the 'Too Little, Too Late' report when it said that our system has failed to plan ahead, failed to listen and failed to act with urgency. As one parent told the commissioner:

"Every delay is another piece of my child's future slipping away".

Both amendments reflect real concerns from the coalface. We support those calls, which reinforce the same basic point: SEN provision cannot function without valuing and resourcing the people who deliver it.

The dire situation is a direct result of the Executive's failure to plan ahead, to properly resource our schools and to give SEN staff the fair pay and recognition that they deserve. Instead, every year, we have the same sticking-plaster approach. It is time to rip off the Band-Aid and treat the problem before any more children are left scarred by the system. We have to do better. Early intervention and timely support must be the foundation of how we support children with additional needs and their families, because every child deserves the chance not just to survive in our education system but to thrive in it.

751 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: 0.04 (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).
  • 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

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 escalation0.02No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.96Yes
Overall judgement0.04At 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
Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits1.00
No identity-related subject0.00
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00
Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:03 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