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

Debate contribution by Mr Jon Burrows on 13 October 2025.

MLA

Mr Jon Burrows

Party at the time

Ulster Unionist 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 5175892

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I was not present for the evidence sessions or the scrutiny as the Bill went through Committee Stage, but, I know, from what I have heard since, that all the members of the Committee are sincere and passionate about doing what they believe is right for children and parents. That common purpose is refreshing. Not everybody gets what they want in a Bill: the Ulster Unionist Party voted at times with the Minister and at times against him, because we judge things on their merits. Our purpose was to ensure that the core aims of the draft legislation were met: that school uniforms are more affordable and that comfort and practicality lie at the heart of school uniform policy, but that that is tempered with flexibility and discretion for schools in doing nothing that undermines the esprit de corps that comes from wearing a uniform. Therefore, we will vote for the legislation. We think that it is a positive step. Maybe some of the issues that have been raised can be revisited at future times and in future debates. However, it is a good day for parents and young people. Much has been said about the guidelines not being published in advance of the legislation. We take the Minister's word for it: he has obtained legal advice that the best thing is for the guidelines to follow the law. However, that is not to give the Minister a blank cheque. That is not how we interpret it. Clearly, the guidelines have to be of sufficient quality and clarity to achieve the core purpose of the Bill. That is why we have stated many times, conscious of the interpretive rules that courts can use, under the famous case of Pepper v Hart, that we must look at the purpose of the legislation, which is to bring affordability to the very centre of everything that schools do. Its purpose is also to ensure — this is a rigorous red line — that no child is stigmatised, disciplined or excluded because their parents cannot afford kit or uniform. That is why we have put that clearly on the record. Ultimately, that is the litmus test on which the legislation will be judged. We therefore hope, expect and, at this stage, trust, although we are verifying it through the available mechanism, that that is what the guidelines will do. It is a positive day.

Yes, I will.

That is a very good question. There is a need for schools to develop such policies with boards of governors and parents, to consult on them and to come to their conclusion. What we do not want to do is to adopt an ideological position that prescribes what schools do. A sensible balance needs to be struck between having legislation that places a legal duty on schools to ensure that uniforms provide comfort, affordability and practicality — to me, that is the most important "CAP" — and having legislation that gives schools flexibility and discretion and provides for common sense, without that legislation being onerous and overly prescriptive. Let us judge the legislation and the guidelines on their outcomes. The opportunity to do that will be through a review. We are therefore happy to support the Bill. It is a positive day for schools, children and parents.

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

Assessment

Not qualifying

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:28 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 reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification