Debate contribution: School Uniforms (Guidelines and Allowances) Bill: Final Stage
Debate contribution by Mr Nick Mathison on .
- MLA
- Mr Nick Mathison
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 13 October 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Executive Committee Business
- Heading
- School Uniforms (Guidelines and Allowances) Bill: Final Stage
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5175473
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Thank you, Mr Speaker. Affordability is at the heart of the very idea of school uniform and of the Bill, but, in the Committee's view, uniform should also be seen to change with the times, so the Committee prioritised listening to the views of the people who wear school uniform: young people. Young people were very clear in their evidence to the Committee on their experiences of how school uniform can impact on different aspects of school life. They were clear about the things that were priorities for them. They were concerned with issues of equality, comfort and practicality, and it is deeply disappointing that the Minister's Bill did not take those issues forward. Youth engagement is not just about listening to young people, ticking a box and then doing what was originally planned regardless. Many young people will be disappointed that their evidence was not taken up by the Minister, as it seems that the Bill reflects very few, if any, of their concerns. The Committee heard from young people on a range of issues connected to uniform, covering a desire not to limit choice based on gender; sensory issues arising from special educational needs; the higher cost of uniform for girls than for boys; period dignity; uniform that makes PE participation accessible; warmth and comfort; access to outdoor learning and play — the list goes on. Young people consistently raised those things with us as being important to them. I sincerely hope that some of those themes will be addressed in the — I trust — soon-to-be-published guidelines, but that is ultimately entirely in the gift of the Minister. One of the Committee's concerns throughout the process was that the Bill as drafted, and as it has come before us today, ultimately leaves all that at the will of the Minister in deciding what goes into the guidelines. I will be clear: I want the guidelines to be effective. The Committee was clear that it wanted the guidelines to be effective, but we do not know what they will look like or whether they will address any of the issues that young people raised. It is over to the Minister now to assure the Committee and the Assembly that the guidelines will make a real difference on not just cost but the wider issues that the Bill strays into. It was never just about affordability. The explanatory and financial memorandum (EFM) for the Bill was clear that issues of comfort and practicality were also to be considered. The Bill before us today has not addressed those issues as comprehensively as it could have done. It is worth noting in particular that the Committee heard evidence from primary-school children who were award-winning activists, describing their campaign for school uniform policies to allow girls to wear trousers. We hoped that the Minister would take up some of that evidence and reflect at Consideration Stage or Further Consideration Stage on whether there was scope to bring forward a proposal on that, but, ultimately, we have not landed in that position. We also heard from Menstruation Matters. Its evidence pointed to some issues of self-consciousness and potential school withdrawal and of attendance at and participation in PE that can arise from school uniform policies not taking proper account of period dignity or other menstruation issues. Again, we do not see the Minister's taking any of those issues forward today. I hope, again, that the Minister can assure us that the guidelines will address some of those concerns. The Committee was cognisant of gender budgeting issues. While the period poverty legislation made in the previous mandate is one helpful measure to remove some of the systemic barriers from girls' equal access to education, dropping the requirement to wear skirts and allowing girls to wear trousers would certainly have been another. Again, I am keen to hear from the Minister about the guidelines: perhaps he can give us some assurance and confidence that we will see in them a really progressive intervention in that space. I acknowledge Claire Sugden's contribution to the debate on that issue in particular. Witnesses across the spectrum went further, saying that uniform options should be capable of being worn regardless of gender. Again, we do not see that in the Bill. Not for the first time, the Committee reflected on the potential for policies that address the needs of minority students to improve conditions for all students and considered a whole range of inclusive options with that end in mind.
I feel strongly that, ultimately, we have potentially done our young people a disservice, as the evidence that we heard and discussed does not seem to have been reflected in the legislation that we are debating. I hope that, in the Committee Stage of future Bills, young people will still have the confidence that the evidence that they give and the time that they take to make their views known will actually be taken on board, and that it will not just be the adults in the room nodding politely, patting them on the head and then continuing to do what they had already intended. I think that Committee members across the board would not want to be in that space when we deal with draft legislation in the future. We all know that, on the Education Committee, essentially anything that we do is likely to impact on the lives of young people in school, so it is important that we get that right. I am really keen to hear the Minister provide clarification as to what will be done with the Bill beyond affordability — we all know that that is important — to try to address those concerns for young people. The Committee saw sustainability as another aspect of the affordability issue. Just as schools should facilitate the provision of second-hand or hand-me-down uniforms, and also that that practice should be encouraged within families, the Committee was clear that, by reducing the gendered aspects of uniforms, you could encourage that practice rather than restrict it. It was also clear that school communities should facilitate the reuse of uniforms by providing uniform banks that parents and pupils could access without feeling any shame or stigma for doing so. It is important to put on record that we know of many excellent examples across the school system where those schemes are run very effectively. The Committee welcomed the explicit reference to that in the Bill but had hoped for a clearer requirement for schools to participate in such a scheme, not just that it would appear in the guidelines in some form, because, again, we are not sure exactly how that will look. It is a shame that the Bill, in its final iteration, does not reflect the views or needs of the stakeholders who gave evidence at Committee. I am pleased, however, that the principle of one key Committee amendment has made it into the Bill, which was highlighted by the Minister in his opening remarks; namely the principle of reporting on the progress of the legislation to deal with affordability and accountability on the impact on the cost of uniforms, the need to review that regularly, and to review regularly the need to implement a cost cap. That, at least, ensures accountability even if, ultimately, members may be sceptical about the clear effects of the Bill on parents' pockets and on the young people who wear the uniforms. I have no doubt that my Committee colleagues will have more to say about all those issues, as we covered a huge amount of ground in the evidence sessions on the Bill. I will conclude my remarks as Chair simply by saying that I want the Bill to deliver. I think that everybody in the Assembly wants to the Bill to deliver. We all have parents in our constituencies who need it to deliver. I hope that it does not prove to be a missed opportunity where improvements that were considered did not end up being reflected in the legislation. We need to ensure that the Bill is genuinely impactful. That will be in the detail of the guidelines. We all await those with interest and hope that their publication happens quickly. I will now make remarks in my capacity as an Alliance member. As you have already highlighted, Mr Speaker, I am a newly elected Member to the Assembly, and this was my first run through legislation at Committee Stage. It was my first opportunity to see a Bill go through each stage of the process. When I came into the Assembly, I had originally intended to table a private Member's Bill on the school uniforms issue. However, the Minister was there with the Bill early on when the institutions were restored, so I did not have the opportunity to bring my proposals forward in more detail. We all know that the cost of school uniforms has been highlighted repeatedly as causing significant financial strain on families. I do not need to rehearse those arguments or convince anybody of that fact. That was clearly amplified when we began to hear directly in Committee from those who are most impacted on by the cost-of-living crisis. Parents get into debt in order to pay for school uniforms. Parents will talk about skipping meals in order to be able to afford something that is required simply for their child to be able to attend school. That cannot be an acceptable state of affairs. The Bill was our opportunity to ensure that parents did not have to face those kinds of scenarios again — it does not matter which school their children go to, or in which sector: the uniform should be affordable — and to ensure that effective and robust measures were introduced not only to support families but to ensure that schools could be held to account for their approach to their uniform policies if they did not prioritise driving down costs. We are all aware that the Bill will create guidelines that schools must adhere to and that those will be the instrument by which changes can be introduced. However, without sight of those guidelines and while we wait for the Minister to publish them— I know that this is rehearsing things that have been raised in the Chamber and in Committee on many occasions, but it does bear repeating — we remain largely in the dark. I do not doubt that the Minister wants a Bill that is effective; I do not know any Minister who sets out to deliver legislation that will not deliver. However, at the moment, we just do not know what those provisions are, so we are operating entirely on trust. I wait with anticipation, as I am sure all colleagues do, to see exactly how the guidelines will deliver on the promise to reduce costs. While there is a fair bit in the Bill, ultimately, when you strip it back, what the Bill does is create guidelines that schools have to adhere to. Until we see those guidelines, we will be guessing about what the impact will be. I know that parents will be watching with the same anticipation to see what the guidelines actually say. For the school that their child attends, which sets the cost of the school uniforms that they have to pay, what will the guidelines actually do? It is vital that we do not let them down, because they are watching. While circumstances have meant that the Bill is not what some Committee members would have wanted, I want to go back to one of the amendments that I referenced in my remarks as Chair: the amendment on accountability. As I have said, parents are watching. They want to know, clearly, what it will mean for them. After the Bill passes Final Stage, lots of statements will no doubt be made that we have now dealt with the cost of school uniforms and we can close that chapter. However, parents want to know what is actually going to change. In that scenario, where there has been some doubt about and a question mark over what the change will look like, it is essential that there is a mechanism to create really clear accountability mechanisms in the Bill. I am pleased that that is in the Bill today, so that we know that the Assembly will have to be updated routinely — at least once a mandate — on whether the Bill has delivered or not; told whether a cost cap will be introduced or not; and, if it is not going to be introduced, told why not. A cost cap is the key mechanism that will deliver meaningful change in this area. It is the Department that has the resources and the ability to deliver that sort of radical legislative intervention. I hope that the Department is taking that work forward meaningfully and seriously. During the Committee evidence sessions, as I referenced in my remarks as Chair, certain school uniform policy themes came through repeatedly. I want to go back to the issues that were raised by children and young people. I will not go through the areas that they highlighted, but I want to address some of the things that have been said in other debates on the matter. It has been said that it is a distraction to talk about SEN and the impact of uniform on young people who experience discomfort; about whether or not girls should be assured of their right to wear trousers rather than skirts; or about issues concerning the outdoor curriculum. On whatever issue, arguments were put forward that that is a distraction and not what the Bill is about. However, the Department's own explanatory and financial memorandum for the Bill states:
"The aim of the Bill is to ensure that school governing bodies put affordability, comfort and sustainability at the centre of their decision-making when they set their school uniform requirements."
Therefore, as soon as the issue of comfort was introduced, we were quite right to ask questions about what makes a school uniform comfortable and sustainable — affordable, yes, but also comfortable and sustainable. As legislators, it is our job to listen to the evidence and act on it. Again, I urge the Minister to keep in mind, when the guidelines are being drafted, the evidence that the Committee heard. The Bill remains light on detail of how those aspects, which were raised particularly by young people, will be reflected in the guidelines. It is light on that detail, and I am really keen to hear more from the Minister on that. The issue of timescales has been raised, and I want to revisit how the Bill progressed through the Assembly. The Committee was, undoubtedly, put under significant pressure from the Minister around our timescales for scrutiny. The Minister made it very clear that he wanted us to work to a timescale in order for the Bill to be completed before November of this year, and that is where we are. It was always highlighted that that was because of the key date of when schools publish their prospectuses. November was highlighted repeatedly as the critical date by which schools needed to have that work done. Alliance was the only party in the Assembly to question the Minister of Education's assurances on the timescales and their deliverability. Others fell into line and backed the Minister without question, but Alliance was always sceptical that that date would be deliverable, and I am keen to be proved wrong. We are in the middle of October, and the Bill has reached Final Stage. That is welcome. Parents, who are keen to see interventions in the affordability space, will be pleased to see that we are here on this date and not waiting for another year. We are, however, also in a position in which November is just a couple of weeks away, with still no clarity for schools on what will change next year. We were told that November is a critical deadline. Schools will be writing and publishing their policies, so I ask genuinely — I am not attempting to score a political point — whether the Minister can clarify what schools are meant to be doing in this scenario. Can he provide clarity on when they will get the guidelines? I ask that because, once they are published, schools will need to start thinking about consulting parents and pupils and about engaging with their suppliers. Suppliers will have to start looking at their arrangements and at the uniform stocks that they hold. We are being told that the new policies are deliverable in the prospectuses in November. I would love that to be the case, but I want to hear how the policies will be delivered, because —.
I will give way.
2,812 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: 0.05 (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 (0.95).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues.
- 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 | 0.08 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.06 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.95 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.05 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.55 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.44 |
| Education structures, integration and community division | 0.01 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
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.