Debate contribution: School Uniforms (Guidelines and Allowances) Bill: Final Stage
Debate contribution by Mr Paul Givan on .
- MLA
- Mr Paul Givan
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 13 October 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Executive Committee Business
- Heading
- School Uniforms (Guidelines and Allowances) Bill: Final Stage
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5175457
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I beg to move
I am pleased that we have now reached the Final Stage of the School Uniforms Bill. I thank each Member who contributed to its scrutiny. Even before I introduced the Bill on 18 February, the need to take action to address the affordability of school uniforms had been expressed from all sides of the House. Despite any misplaced narratives about a diluted Bill or missed opportunities to be prescriptive, the Bill that I commend to the House is strong and appropriate. Once again, I record my thanks to the Office of the Legislative Counsel (OLC) for its diligence and for the significant work that it put into the Bill. I make no apologies for my confidence that the Bill is a strong Bill that will make a difference for parents. At Second Stage, I set out the level of support for the proposals that underpin the Bill that was expressed through a policy consultation, which received over 7,500 responses. I repeat my thanks to those who responded to it. I thank the range of stakeholders that contributed at Committee Stage. Their voices are important, and I assure them that all voices have been heard. The principles of the Bill were agreed by the Executive prior to its introduction and then approved by the Assembly at Second Stage. Nothing since then has weakened its provisions. I know that the Committee for Education wanted to take more time to deliberate over the Bill, but the amendment that my party colleagues tabled on the timing of Committee Stage was important, and the fact that it was agreed to means that, subject to the voting today, the Bill can be in operation in time to make a difference for the 2026-27 school year, which is next year. Without that amendment, the Bill would still be in Committee for up to another two months. There would have been no benefit for parents from the legislation for a further school year. I therefore make no apology for putting the needs of hard-working parents before a leisurely analysis by the Committee, which I do not believe would have resulted in a materially different outcome. I repeat my thanks, however, to the Committee for reporting before the summer recess in the end. I know that Committee members took their scrutiny role seriously. No further amendments can now be made to the Bill. Either Members vote to support it as it stands and therefore help families that are struggling with the cost of school uniforms or they do not. That is the decision for the House to make today. Last week, the Committee discussed introducing an amending Bill, without its members taking on board any of the legal information that was provided throughout the process, without their understanding what the Bill enables guidelines to address and without their monitoring the impact of the guidelines once they are introduced. I am content that the Executive's Bill can deliver on the ambition that we set at the beginning of the process. I fully appreciate the Bill's impact on timing, given that school prospectuses will be published in the coming months. I wrote to the Committee to remind it of that. Whether its members are disgruntled about not having seen the draft guidelines, the guidelines will be shared with schools in the coming weeks as a matter of urgency. Guidelines follow the law. Today will determine whether the School Uniforms Bill becomes law.
To be clear, I would not have introduced the Bill if I was not determined that the guidelines would work. I am absolutely satisfied that the Bill gives everything needed for the guidelines to work. Nothing is lacking in the Bill. No one should rush to judge its outcome without having the guidelines in operation first. That serves no one well, including parents.
Let me take Members through what the Bill will do. I will be brief, but it is important for Members, even at this late stage, to understand it. The Bill will make the departmental guidelines statutory. It will place a duty on schools not merely to have regard to the guidelines but to adhere to them. It will give a legally enforceable power of direction to the Department should any school decide not to materially follow the guidelines or decide to discipline or exclude its pupils for non-compliance with the uniform policy when they may not be able to afford it. I assure Members that, despite some suggestions to the contrary having been made at Consideration Stage and Further Consideration Stage, there will be no hesitation: where a direction is needed, it will be given. I trust in the professionalism of our schools. I know that schools want to do the right thing for their pupils. The guidelines that the Bill requires will be strong, and I trust that schools will follow them fully. The concern about pupils not meeting the full uniform requirements because of cost should not be an ongoing issue. The Bill requires guidelines about school uniform policies to explicitly address a range of matters. That will result in there being more affordable uniforms, designed in consultation with those wearing them and those paying for them. The Bill requires that parents and pupils must be consulted by a school when its uniform policy is being devised, that guidelines must specify how often the policy is to be reviewed and that that, again, requires consultation. All existing human rights and equality legislation applies to how the Department writes the guidelines and how schools implement them. The Bill requires that "unfair costs aspects", which it defines, must be addressed. That is explicitly set in the context of affordability for lower-income households. There should be no doubt that the Bill addresses affordability. That is fundamental to how it has been drafted. The Bill also requires that the comfort, practicality, nature and adequacy of clothing being required for a range of school-based activities must be addressed. Uniform policies must address value for money, the lending of uniform and the use of clothing banks. Uniforms must be available from more than one supplier unless evidence is provided that a single-supplier agreement secures value for money for parents. A range of information must be published so that transparency is secured. That will include the rationale for uniform design, the cost of uniform items, where the uniform can be purchased from and a range of other matters. The Bill allows for a cap to be set on the number of branded items and/or the cost of uniform items or the total uniform. I have made it clear that further consultation on those details will take place and that the outcome of that consultation will inform the setting of any cap. That is to ensure that any cap is agile and fit for purpose and will remain so. In addition to a cap, the Bill allows for uniform guidelines to set out what is reasonable or unreasonable for branded items, limited or single suppliers, daywear and PE kit and allows for differentiation to be applied by school type, year group and Key Stage. That is all set out in the Bill's provisions. To say that the Bill has been "diluted" or is a "missed opportunity", as some Members have done, is to misunderstand the strength of the legislation and what it can deliver. The Bill extends eligibility for the uniform grant to pupils in independent schools who cannot currently receive it. It future-proofs, through draft affirmative regulation-making powers, so that, if needed, guidelines can be applied to preschool providers. Guidelines will be laid before the Assembly, and a report will be completed at least every three years. Members can be assured that, even without the provisions, I and my Department will monitor the impact of the Bill. I have worked to make a difference by introducing the legislation. Monitoring the impact of the Bill and the associated guidelines is critical to making sure that that happens. I return to my earlier point, which is that I am confident that the impact will be positive for parents. The Bill delivers. My confidence is based on legal expertise: not mine or any other Member's but professional expertise. The School Uniforms Bill is strong and will be effective. If Members vote to support it, it will take effect from the 2026-27 school year. I am also confident that every Member wants to see that for every family in their constituency. I commend the Bill to the House.
1,417 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
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: 0.03 (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 (0.90).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- 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
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.04 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.05 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.90 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.68 |
| Education structures, integration and community division | 0.25 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.03 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.03 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:27 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.