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

Debate contribution by Mr Pat Sheehan on 29 September 2025.

MLA

Mr Pat Sheehan

Party at the time

Sinn Féin

Date

29 September 2025

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Executive Committee Business

Heading

School Uniforms (Guidelines and Allowances) Bill: Further Consideration Stage

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5139340

Read the official Assembly record

Text

The issue of guidelines has been raised on a number of occasions during the debate. The content of the guidelines will be critical, because that is what will ultimately dictate whether the Bill will make any difference to hard-pressed families. As a member of the Education Committee, I place on record again my frustration at the fact that we have still not seen draft guidelines, despite having been promised sight of them before recess by senior officials from the Department. I will speak in support of amendment Nos 2 and 6 and in opposition to amendment No 3. Amendment No 2 is straightforward. It broadens the guidance on practicality to cover academic work, play, sport and outdoor learning. That is sensible, and we can support it. Amendment No 6 is similar. It is a technical addition to link guidance to Key Stages; again, there is no difficulty there. The real battle is over amendment Nos 3 and 4. At Consideration Stage, we agreed a strong package to end the rip-off of single-supplier arrangements and the sweetheart deals that some schools and suppliers enjoy at families' expense. Schools would have been required to ensure that at least one independent retailer could sell every item, and they had to publish their supplier contracts. That is how you bring real competition into the system and stop families being ripped off. Amendment No 4 is offered as a replacement, but it is clearly weaker. It allows exclusive supplier deals to continue so long as a school says that a deal offers value for money. The Minister made a case about having listened to experts and about experts having said that the term "declaration" has a legal meaning that means that schools would have to provide evidence of value for money, but I do not accept that. I am not an expert, but for the ordinary person on the street, the word "declaration" has a particular meaning, and it does not mean, in any definition that I have seen, that the school would have to provide evidence. That, therefore, is not real accountability; it is a loophole, and the sweetheart deals could effectively continue, as will the rip-offs. Parents will be left carrying the cost. Families are watching the debate. They want to know whether we in the Assembly are serious about cutting costs or whether we are content to let schools and suppliers carry on as before. Our job is to stand with those families, and that means keeping the protections and provisions that were agreed at the previous stage. I agree with the other Members who said today that we have lost an opportunity. There is a missed opportunity. We had a real chance of bringing forward a strong and robust piece of legislation that would have driven down the cost of uniforms and made them more affordable for hard-pressed families. Unfortunately, the Bill has been weakened to such an extent that we are not confident that that will happen.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:18 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