Debate contribution: Special Educational Needs: Crisis in Provision

Debate contribution by Mr David Brooks on 8 September 2025.

MLA

Mr David Brooks

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist Party

Date

8 September 2025

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Special Educational Needs: Crisis in Provision

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5068858

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I welcome Mr Burrows to his seat and to share in his good wishes to Colin Crawford. All of us who sat on Committee with him recognise the tribute that Mr Burrows paid to Colin, and I stand with him on that. Today's topic of discussion is familiar to us all in the Chamber, and I have said that before.

All of us — I include the Minister in that — share the ambition to aspire to more and to work to deliver better for our young people with special educational needs. That is reflected in the fact that, earlier, we had Mr Gaston commend the Alliance Party and my colleague Peter Martin commend Danny on his speech. I say to Mr Burrows that that is not a normal occurrence: do not get too used to it. We all want every child in Northern Ireland to have a happy and fulfilling educational experience that develops them to their potential. Nobody expects the transformation of SEN services to happen overnight. We all understand those who have been at the coalface. We have heard of classroom assistants, teachers and parents awaiting placements who, at times, have had reason to lose faith and confidence in the system. Nevertheless, I believe that those most involved in the sector understand the situation and want to see progress. The concerns raised in the motion and the call for more action and clearer timelines are, no doubt, reflections of the urgency that is felt by parents, educators and communities. That said, I want to respond with a recognition of the ambitious path that has already been charted by the Minister and the careful work that is under way. In February of this year, the Minister published what was, perhaps, the most ambitious SEN reform agenda in a generation and, alongside it, a five-year delivery plan designed to ensure that children with SEN receive the right support at the right times. I was going to go on to expand on and to go through some of the outcomes framework and so on, but the discussion that took place between my colleague and the Chair of the Education Committee has probably shone more light on some of the views around that than I am likely to. Work is ongoing on that, as my colleague highlighted. The catalyst for the motion being tabled is frustration around the annual issues regarding placements. I understand that, as it stands — perhaps, the Minister will clarify this in his remarks — we have few or no children currently awaiting a placement. I understand that that does not mean that all is well, as we have heard in the Chamber, and I do not seek to portray that it is. Issues remain with children awaiting facilities to be completed and built, and there will be parents who will appeal for a different placement — some justifiably so. I do not think that anyone stands here to paint a perfect picture. Equally, however, we should not dismiss the progress that there has been, for political means. We know that the estate is in a poor state and requires vast investment. It was slightly disingenuous of the Member who spoke before me to suggest that the Minister has a budget and could, therefore, prioritise as he wishes. We know that there is a shortfall in the budgets; we know that the block grant is not meeting needs, so —.

Yes, I will give way.

The Minister will, no doubt, deal with the points that the Member has raised, but we are all aware of the vast amount of investment that would be required, particularly around the estate and so on, to make the right provisions available to enable these children to have the right places and the appropriate setting. We all know the challenges around that — I do not want to underplay them — but I am sure that the Minister will address the points that the Member has made. We recognise that, due to the issues with the estate, some of the placements can be suboptimal compared with what we aspire to, ideally. Indeed, we know that it is not what the Minister aspires to, not least through his plans, as outlined, for new special schools in the future. However, rather than standing still, he has been working to ensure that, as the estate sits, it is used to its full potential, be that through creating further classrooms where space or resource allows or undertaking a refurbishment, as was the case in my constituency where a decision was made to refurbish the old Elmgrove Primary School to allow Greenwood Assessment Centre not only to move in but to expand its services. Not so long ago, Members were raising issues that had been raised by families of children who attended Greenwood — a wonderful school, which, admittedly, operated in less-than-optimal facilities at times. There we have an example of what can happen: the Minister recognised that the plans for a new special school at the Orangefield site could not come quickly enough; he visited the school; he listened to the issues; he saw the potential; and he moved to ensure that, while we awaited the investment for the new special schools, new places and new spaces would be made available in the near future by swelling the estate.

I share the ambition of the Minister, and all in the House, that, in future, SEN children will be notified of their placements no later than any other child. Addressing the fundamental challenges on that front will, as we have said, take significant investment from the entire Executive when they consider their priorities. Whilst I understand to some degree that it is motherhood and apple pie to say so, we have always supported the need for a less siloed and more joined-up approach across the Executive.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

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