Debate contribution: School Uniforms (Guidelines and Allowances) Bill: Consideration Stage

Debate contribution by Mr David Brooks on 15 September 2025.

MLA

Mr David Brooks

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist Party

Date

15 September 2025

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Executive Committee Business

Heading

School Uniforms (Guidelines and Allowances) Bill: Consideration Stage

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5099225

Read the official Assembly record

Text

The legislation should not greatly divide the House. There were several times during the Bill's Committee Stage when some were distracted from the Bill's original intent and the core promise that we and a number of other parties in the House laid out as our overriding aim: to bring down the cost of school uniforms for hard-pressed families across Northern Ireland. I thank the Minister for introducing the Bill, and we should all be united in ensuring that no child is denied opportunity or dignity in school because of the cost of a blazer or a PE kit. To be fair, despite the areas where we differ, I do not believe that any Member here is blind to the pressures that households face, particularly in today's climate, where every pound is stretched further than before. While we share that concern, it is our duty to ensure that the way in which we legislate is proportionate and workable. There is always a balance to be struck between affordability, with checks and balances against excess, and school autonomy. To be clear, most of our schools are mindful not only of their pupils but of the families that support them. Schools seek to do their best to balance uniform requirements and practicality against the costs that, they know, their choices will place on parents and guardians. The schools are communities in themselves, and often uniform is a vital part of fostering identity, discipline and pride. In seeking to solve one problem, we must not create another by imposing rigid, centralised rules that leave governors, principals and parents without flexibility or, worse, add to the burden of bureaucracy. It has been clear in the Committee process that some of the aspects that we might understandably wish to have in the Bill are neither as simple as they sound nor as likely, without significantly more work or learning from other jurisdictions, to have as positive an impact on parents and schools as we might wish. I suggest that the answer lies in strengthening the guidance and partnership, rather than legislating every detail. The Bill does that, and it gives the Minister the power to bring in sanctions where justified, should a school gratuitously continue to ignore guidance. While such powers under the Bill would reside in the Minister's gift — Pat has looked at that point from another angle — I remind the House that, as the mandate draws on, we do not know who will hold the portfolio in future. Parties should not be unduly influenced in their judgement over how aligned or not they are with the current Minister. I thank Pat for his vote of confidence in the current Minister, but I wonder which party he is afraid of holding the post in future. Parents want fairness and transparency, schools want discretion and respect for their ethos, and that balance can be struck appropriately. We are mindful, too, of the impact that such legislation can have on many of our small retailers, and we heard about that from Retail NI. Those retailers have been diligently serving families and schools for many years — some for generations. The Committee heard from a panel from Retail NI about the complex web of supplies and turnaround times and the effects that that can have, particularly in trying to come to a conclusion on a cap. While we cannot expect that they can compete on price with online giants for generic items — some have moved away from supplying PE kit due to schools' direct arrangements with branded manufacturers, as we have heard — they have long done their best to provide good school-specific items at the lowest cost they can to our communities. As we move through the clauses of the Bill, our party has given and will continue to give each one careful consideration. We have listened to the sensible provisions to improve accountability and transparency, but we have resisted and will resist measures that add bureaucracy without significant gain or have been more about projecting ideology over achieving a better outcome for families. We are not minded to oppose amendment Nos 1 and 4 to clause 1. There are some concerns about the additional bureaucracy but not so much as to oppose. Despite allowing it to pass to this point, we will oppose amendment No 8. That is the new clause 4A. We share the concerns that the Minister laid out in correspondence to the Chair of the Committee this morning, and we feel that the terminology of the clause is unclear. There is also a lack of recognition that uniforms at secondary level are normally, as a standard, more expensive than those at primary school. Clearly, we understand that, as he has laid out, the Minister will undertake to table an amendment at Further Consideration Stage that should give the same outcome as that which Members intend but takes into account the complexities around the cap that the Committee has heard. On principle, we will also oppose amendment No 9 to clause 7. The amendment would remove consistency, as, again, the Minister laid out, with article 101 of the Education and Libraries (Northern Ireland) Order 1986, and we feel that the impact of the amendment would be limited, as the assessment of whether a direction is required still takes place. We will support amendment No 10. We will oppose amendment Nos 11 and 12, as with amendment No 8, in light of the correspondence and engagement with the Minister. On amendment No 11, it is on a similar basis to that laid out with amendment No 9, as it introduces inconsistency with existing provisions and legislation and prevents consultation with the school and an opportunity to resolve any issues informally. On amendment No 12, we share the Minister's concern and do not feel that placing in legislation rather than at the Minister's discretion the requirement to name and shame schools is helpful or necessary.

It can, of course, act as a deterrent. In all of these things, it is about a balance. Naming and shaming and balance in any sector on any cause is always a controversial subject, so it is really about whether we think that the effect that naming and shaming a school might have is disproportionate and, not least, unhelpful as regards a conducive atmosphere between the Department and our schools. It is about finding that balance. I understand the argument, but, in this case, I side on the other side, I am afraid. We must be clear: the objective of affordable, accessible school uniforms for families and of no child making school choices either on the institution that they desire or the activities and subjects that they get involved with on the basis of affordability is an aim that we should surely all share, but the means of achieving that must be fair, workable and respectful of school communities. That is the test that we have always applied in considering the Bill. I look forward to seeing it progress and, even more, to the delivery of reduced costs for parents and guardians across Northern Ireland.

1,187 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:07 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