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

Debate contribution by Mrs Michelle Guy on 15 September 2025.

MLA

Mrs Michelle Guy

Party at the time

Alliance 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 5099240

Read the official Assembly record

Text

It is good to have legislation before us today. Delivering and scrutinising legislation is what we are here for, and I appreciate the opportunity to debate the selected proposed amendments to the School Uniforms Bill. I thank the Committee for its careful work on scrutinising the Bill in a very compressed time frame, and I also thank the Bill Office, which provided diligent and invaluable support to Members. The Alliance Party has long campaigned for action on the cost of school uniforms, so we welcome the fact that at least some progress has been made after years of inaction. It is a shame, however, that the Bill lacks ambition and scope. For example, I got up today and thought about what I would wear for "comfort and practicality", which is the language of the Bill, and I opted for trousers, yet girls across Northern Ireland do not necessarily have that choice, and the Bill will do nothing to address that. Let me be clear that our concern is that the Bill's main achievement risks being that the Minister can say that he did something: a neat box ticked for an election leaflet rather than genuine relief for families. We all understand the importance of tradition in schools, but policies must never exclude. Schools that are funded by public money should not create barriers for children from families on low or modest incomes.

The amendments in group 1 are on monitoring and enforcement. Legislation has value only if it changes practice. That means having real monitoring, real enforcement and real accountability. Families cannot afford another round of warm words and glossy guidance; they need affordable uniforms for their children, and the Assembly should accept nothing less. The amendments in this group are essential, because, without good enforcement, those schools that already demonstrate best practice in affordability will continue to do so, while those that do not will simply be able to carry on without consequence. Amendment No 1 is important to ensure that the Department regularly reviews the statutory guidelines. We imagine that the Minister will want to do that more regularly initially anyway in order to ensure that the guidelines have the impact of making school uniforms more cost-effective. The Department's report on the consultation made it clear that there was widespread support for that regular review, with 77% of respondents agreeing:

"schools should review their uniform policies every 3 years",

and 79% agreeing with "monitoring and evaluation proposals". It therefore makes complete sense that the Department should have to review statutory guidance and that it should not be left as a "from time to time" approach. Amendment No 4 simply requires the Department to lay the guidelines before the Assembly, which is the minimum standard of transparency and democratic oversight for them. I am glad to say that amendment No 8 passed unanimously at Committee Stage. That amendment is a response to the fact that the Department was not able to present details on how a price cap could work or provide a preferred option. We know that the Department will consult specifically on the price cap, and I hope that the Minister can speak to when that will be and to his confidence that it will become a reality. We know that there is support for a price cap. The consultation report notes that 88% of respondents supported a "cost control measure being introduced". When I spoke to families about the legislation, that was the element that they told me that they would like to see. That is what people believe will bring costs down. I fully understand why they believe that, especially given that we have not seen any draft guidance. In the absence of draft statutory guidance from the Minister on the proposals for a price cap, Alliance tabled this amendment. It holds the Department to account on a price cap, stating that it must report:

"at least once every three years"

on the:

"assessment of the cost of school uniforms",

on the effect of a cap, if introduced — or, if no cap has been introduced, why not — and on "subsequent plans" for guidance on the cap. Amendment No 8 is, essentially, a scrutiny amendment. Amendment No 9 is concerned with directions on adherence to guidelines. Essentially, it is about how the Department will ensure that there is compliance with its statutory guidance. We could not understand why the Department would not give directions to schools that failed to adhere to guidelines. That is especially the case when there is an allowance or transitional guidance in place in the Bill. As outlined in clause 7(1)(a), the Department will be assured, through its investigation, about whether a school is "failing to adhere ... to guidelines". When we are talking about directions to the school manager, we see that those are clearly outlined in clause 7(5). I truly do not understand why that amendment would not be supported. The Department gave little assurance or clarity on the issue; therefore, the Committee felt that it was important to ensure that the Department will do its job, although I hope that it will not be necessary. Amendment No 11 is about simplifying the process of how the Department issues directions. Again, the majority of the Committee could not understand why, after having conversations with a school on potential breaches of the guidance — that is, of course, the right approach — the Department would then go back to consult the school manager on their proposals for directions. Amendment No 12 is not about naming and shaming schools. There is a considerable road to travel for engagement with schools before a direction would be given. Publicly funded schools should not have policies that breach statutory guidelines. There should be transparency on that.

963 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