Peter Weir
Strangford · Ulster Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“Funding was secured for that scheme, and we have been able to take further steps on it. As highlighted by my colleague Diane Dodds, we have seen my successor, the current Minister, be able to implement it at the beginning of September 2021 and funding be made available for it.”
“One of the great fears — I saw it particularly, as Education Minister, from the point of view of children and the domestic setting between partners — was what was going to happen in families when the doors closed and the locks went on. What was happening behind closed doors?”
“There is another significant element of the Bill. I have spoken about it in the Chamber on a couple of occasions. There is always a slight danger that we, as legislators, see legislation as being the end of a process and think that we can pack it away, put it on the shelf and forget about the problem because it has been solved.”
“I welcome the passage of the Bill's Final Stage and commend all the campaigners who have pressed so hard for it and the Bill sponsor. For Pat Catney, hearing some of the tributes must be like hearing eulogies at your funeral, without having to go through the indignity of dying, which is always a double advantage.”
“As highlighted by a number of Members, the impact of period poverty, though not confined to it, has been particularly acute in young women's education. We know that the impact can lead to the missing of education and constraints within education, and that it does so in a disproportionate way.”
“I support the Bill's Final Stage, and I commend the Bill's sponsor for introducing it. I thank the Minister and the Department for the positive attitude that they have taken towards it.”
The complete record
Every one of 3,831 lines we hold for Peter Weir, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 16 of 77.
“The review may well have comments to make directly on how we apply funding to make sure that we get the best possible results from any investment.”
“I take the Member's point about the common funding formula. A summary of proposals on that is being prepared by officials. The problem that we tend to see with the common funding formula is that, unless there is a commitment from the Executive or others to provide additional funding, there is a fight over whether we are taking money out of one school and putting it into another. Ideally, there should be greater funding across the board. The detail of that is being drawn together by officials. Some schools — for example, those operating on split sites — will have concerns about whether there is adequate funding. I visited one of those schools yesterday. It is about assessing what information has been gathered not only for the short term but for the wider review of education as a whole.”
“<BR /> <BR />Finally, the work of the panel on underachievement and the forthcoming independent review of education are further opportunities to transform our system and improve outcomes for children and young people. I repeat that the closure of the programme does not mean the end of transformation; rather, it will be delivered in a different manner.”
“The formal closure of the programme means only that further elements of transformation will be delivered using a different approach. I am keen that policy reform and service delivery improvements continue to be made wherever there is clear and evident need. Some aspects of the transformation programme have already been delivered, and others are continuing as planned, such as the work on an approach to a 14-19 education and training strategy. Other ongoing transformative work includes the scoping of proposals to provide flexibility for school starting age; work to address teacher concerns about workloads and accountability; and a programme of improvement in the Education Authority (EA) relating to services for children and young people with special educational needs (SEN).”
“I thank the Member for her question. The transformation programme was an innovative approach to policy and operational review developed by departmental officials in April 2018. It was established in anticipation of the return of the Assembly and for discussion with an incoming Minister. Work across a number of areas was progressed to good effect until the point at which I had to divert departmental staff resources to deal with the significant work associated with the pandemic. Following advice from officials, I took the decision to formally close the programme in March 2021 on the basis that there is no guaranteed funding stream for 2021-22 or beyond. <BR /> <BR />I would like to make it clear that this in no way means an end to transformation activity in the Department.”
“You will find that the development proposal for that grammar stream was turned down by the permanent secretary. It was before my time, so that is not accurate. I am very happy to see bilateral education. Where a bilateral choice is made, that is perfectly people's right. For instance, Lagan College let in a percentage of pupils from an AQE background. For reasons, it has moved away from that in the last two years. I have not denied any form of streaming at all. It is about choice, which is why I reject both the amendment and the motion.”
“I have not. There has been no development proposal for a grammar stream for any —.”
“<BR /> <BR />If we remove choice, we lift the ladder away from a generation of children who will not be given that opportunity. I appreciate the points that my Strangford colleague made about parental choice. It is perfectly her right to choose not to go down that route. What she does not have a right to do is to try to impose that choice on everyone else. People have the opportunity —.”
“The other issue is that it takes the focus away from where it needs to be in respect of underachievement. The focus needs to be on the wider context of our education system and not driven by ideological considerations. The principal problem, and where we need to tackle areas of underachievement, is in a lack of early intervention. It is about parental support. It is about community buy-in. If we simply talk about problems not being solved by the age of 11, we miss the real problem. Areas of emphasis need to be supporting whole-school improvement, building and spreading leadership capacity, strengthening collaboration and partnership and embedding technology in educational pedagogy. I pay tribute to the professionalism of our teachers who have worked hard to do that.”
“<BR /> <BR />The other concern I have is that, when we constantly go at the subject, it provides a great opportunity for a certain amount of Punch and Judy on selection at 11.”
“No, sorry. I presume that you will be summing up, but my time is short so, unfortunately, I am not in a position to give way. I apologise to the Member for not giving way. <BR /> <BR />The position with our results is that, not simply year-on-year but generation after generation, our results have outperformed those in England, Scotland and Wales. We are the leader throughout the United Kingdom. It is also the case that we have seen, over a number of years, an improvement of over 14 percentage points for school-leavers in receipt of free school meals. There is a need to tackle underachievement, but, leaving aside the results for 2020, when GCSEs were done, effectively, through a non-examination system, the number leaving school without any qualifications or GCSEs in each of those years has been less than 1%, so progress has been made.”
“Yes, we have, and it has been well highlighted that we have —.”
“I support a system in which every child, regardless of background, postcode, social group, religion or ethnicity, has the opportunity to get into any of those schools. <BR /> <BR />I have to say that I do not recognise much of the education system that is portrayed in the university report. Post-primary numbers are increasing, not decreasing; indeed, enrolments in non-grammars have been rising in recent years. The report advises that our primary curriculum is distorted by the presence of selection, yet international studies tell us that we have a truly world-class primary education system and a consistently excellent international performance. In maths, we have the highest performers in Europe and the seventh-highest performers in the world. <BR /> <BR />Mention was made of results.”
“I want to see opportunities for all. The reality is that, whatever the flaws in the current system, we see, for instance, in Queen's University and Ulster University probably greater social mobility mix than in many universities throughout the United Kingdom. The pathway to greater fairness is not clear-cut. The Ulster University report signals New Zealand, and I think that that was quoted by the Chair of the Committee. In New Zealand, no fewer than 15% of pupils go to fee-paying schools. Is that the potential alternative? Is selection by wealth better than selection by ability? <BR /> <BR />I support the right of schools to select on the basis of academic ability. I also support their right to say that they do not want to use that as a methodology.”
“We also see, whether it is in England, Scotland, Wales or the Republic of Ireland, a situation in which the choice is not between selective and non-selective or between grammar and non-grammar; it is between comprehensive schools and private schools. In England, 7% of parents pay an average of £30,000 to get a child into those schools. <BR /> <BR />I genuinely want to see a level of social mobility. I do not want to see the situation that we have with, for instance, the leader of the Conservative Party and Prime Minister, who is privately educated; the leader of the Labour Party in England, who is privately educated; or, I have to say, the leader of Sinn Féin in the Republic of Ireland, who is privately educated”
“I appreciate that the Member has at least a fairly clear-cut and honest position, which is that he wants to see the abolition of the grammar-school system. I assume that that is the case. <BR /> <BR />The reality is that, in the long run, you cannot divorce academic selection from the existence of grammar schools. It is disingenuous to pretend otherwise. What, then, do we see as the alternatives? <BR /> <BR />Mention was made of a postcode lottery, but what we see in England with comprehensive schools is that what are perceived to be the best schools then create a situation in which house prices close to those schools rise enormously; indeed, if you have enough money, you can effectively buy your child a place in those schools. There is no doubt that the same would happen here.”
“In the same way as we have seen, with the exception —. Yes, I will give way to Mr Carroll. He is always entertaining, if nothing else.”
“No, I am not giving way further. I have a lot to get through.”
“And in the absence of academic selection, the problem is that there is not really any viable alternative. That is the problem. We need a bit of honesty in this debate. I am not going to throw this at any particular party, but, in the long run, the scenario of non-academic selection will mean the ending of grammar schools as we now know them. That is what has happened —.”
“Grammar schools are not simply able just to fill their numbers. All schools have a cap on numbers, so I reject that. <BR /> <BR />In the short term, it will lead to selection by way of family connection, but if we move to a situation where academic selection —.”
“Do your parents teach at the school?" We have a short-term alternative being proposed for those schools of hereditary grammar-school places to a greater extent than would happen in the House of Lords, yet that is what is being proposed.”
“<BR /> <BR />If we look at the Ulster University report, we see that there are two key issues. First, at the heart of this is what would replace academic selection at the age of 11. Is the alternative better, fairer and more equitable? The short answer is no. Selection will take place in this society. I have some sympathy, particularly for Mr Butler, in his efforts to try to find ways forward on this. What was the alternative that was produced? Well, actually, many of the schools that Members are commending effectively select on the basis of family connections: "Does your brother or sister go to the school? Did your parents go to the school?”
“I waited for a long period of clarity, and I did not get it. I think that your opportunity has gone in relation to that. It is also disingenuous because it says, "Let us find some form of compromise or agreement", but predicated on the assumption that you automatically abolish academic selection before you even have that debate, which seems to be utterly disingenuous. <BR /> <BR />It is also the case that, regardless of their views, Members know that opinion in our society is deeply divided on the issue. There is no universal agreement. Indeed, we were told, when the formal state transfer tests were abolished, that transfer and academic selection would wither on the vine and fall under myriad legal challenges, yet, on the last occasion when the unofficial tests took place, there were more sitting them than at the time of abolition.”
“While I may disagree with the Chair of the Committee, at least he did throw out a number of other locations where alternatives have been looked at, but the Member, in his honesty —”
“No, I have a lot to get through. If someone has not had the opportunity to speak, I will give way briefly. From that point of view, I have a lot that I want to get through in relation to this <BR /> <BR />I turn briefly to the SDLP amendment. It is at best naive and at worst disingenuous. I say "naive" because it says, "Let us abolish academic selection and get something sorted out in the next year or two by way of agreement." The debate around academic selection predates the existence of most people in the House, me included. It goes back to shortly after the Second World War and, particularly, the 1960s. To suggest and try to pretend that there is some magic solution out there that there will be some common consensus around is naive. To be fair to the proposer of the amendment, when pressed on this, he did not offer any alternative.”
“The Member has already spoken. I would be able to respond better if we got some clarity out of the SDLP as to what actual alternative was there. <BR /> <BR />It will not come as any great surprise to anyone to know that I do not support the motion or the amendment, and I will not give an undertaking to remove academic selection.”
“I share the Member's disappointment, and I am sure that he shares my lack of surprise on the issue. I am not particularly surprised by the motion. To be fair to the party opposite that tabled the motion, its sentiment reflects a long-standing approach by that party, so its position does not in any way surprise me. It will not come as the greatest shock to them either that —.”
“I will give way to Mr Allister because he has not had the opportunity to take part in the debate.”
“It seems that we can have various sectors, such as Catholic maintained, controlled, integrated and Irish-medium, but one choice that others are keen to deny is any form of academic selection. That academic selection route is not compulsory on any family, nor is it compulsory on any school. I do not seek to force any school to take the route of academic selection, and nor should I. Many schools do not use it.”
“At the outset, I thank everybody who has contributed to the debate. Unsurprisingly, there has not been a meeting of minds, but, in general, the tone has been reasonable. <BR /> <BR />Our education system, particularly post-primary, has two great advantages. First, regardless of what position Members have on academic selection, I am sure that they will agree that we, in Northern Ireland, are fortunate to have a strong network of post-primary schools — selective and non-selective — that deliver well for our young people. I praise all those who offer those fantastic opportunities. Secondly, our system is based on choice, one of which is a choice for parents who wish to pursue the route of academic selection.”
“I appreciate that the Member's time is brief. I have been listening intently to the Member for the past nine minutes. He rightly says that he wants clarity and certainty. Will he outline what the SDLP, or his own, alternative is to academic selection? We have heard about abolishing something, but, as yet, he has simply said, "We want to have agreement on something else"; no proposal on what the alternative is has been put forward by the Member.”
“<BR /> <BR />3.30 pm <BR /> <BR />There may well have to be a further paper brought to the Executive very shortly so that they can confirm the exact details of the proposals, but, broadly speaking, the Department of Finance and the Executive as a whole have indicated support for the continuation of the programme through 2021-22.”
“That is the aim, but, because it is a one-off costing, it is not directly baselined in the budget. Before the conclusion of the Budget exercise in March, Departments were asked to put in their bids for the pot of COVID money. As such, it has been agreed provisionally that money could be made available for the continuation through COVID of the Engage programme to allow it to run from September onward. Similarly, as I indicated, the aim is also to have a level of academic and other interventions on the youth side during the summer.”
“We are waiting on final confirmation beyond that. The roll-out of the Engage programme, which equates to about £5·5 million for this term, will continue for the rest of the term. As part of that, we are looking to finalise the details for the school year 2021-22 and what will happen over the summer. As I indicated, it is important that the programme gives schools the opportunity to tailor what they are getting and to focus as much as possible on where they see the best interventions. Quite often, the best things are decided at grassroots level.”
“As I indicated, it is beneficial to have a flexible approach to the curriculum. Minister Long and I met a month or so ago on the Gillen recommendations. We have started work for the two Departments to work closely together on those recommendations, most of which fall to DOJ but there is an overlap with Education. RSE is a requirement for all schools, but it is not simply a one-size-fits-all approach, because, depending on age and experience, there can be a differentiation. It is important to look at areas of minimum content, particularly to ensure that society reflects concerns about abuse, which lie beyond what is happening in the classroom but can transmit, unfortunately, from generation to generation in families, and a proper understanding and acceptance of consent. That is critical as we move ahead.”
“That means that we can respond to changing events and changing necessities. That is an advantage of our system, as opposed to what happens in some other jurisdictions, where there is an attempt to impose from the top down.”
“That will require a change in legislation. Leaving everything else aside, I suspect that that will not happen overnight. Internationally, when any subject is made mandatory in the curriculum, there is no real causal link of that being better taught than other subjects. There is a requirement for all schools to deliver RSE, and it is critical that we look at minimum standards. Consequently, and in light of the Gillen report, my officials and DOJ officials are working on a range of issues to see where minimum content should be. That is particularly focused on issues such as domestic abuse and consent. Those are critical. We adopt a cautious approach in making elements compulsory because that can sometimes crowd out other elements of the curriculum. Overall, Northern Ireland has benefited from flexibility on what can be delivered.”
“I am committed to that sector and to every sector because it is important that every child is looked after. As such, there will be a range of decisions. Today, for example, I signed off on the transformation of a school in east Antrim to integrated status. We will try to support all pupils.”
“Consequently, a range of recommendations best falls within the remit of that panel. We are talking about 39 recommendations. Rather than trying to extrapolate reasons why each of the 11 individual recommendations has not gone forward, if the Member writes to me about specific recommendations that he feels are not being taken forward, I will provide the rationale. <BR /> <BR />I do not know whether the Speaker will ask the Member to remain behind and write, "I will not be late for the Assembly", 100 times as a form of sanction.”
“The Member is right about the specifics. Some processes can be taken forward and brought into place. The authors prioritised certain individual recommendations. If there are discussions with the sectoral bodies, they will say, "Well, actually, that is less of a priority as it is less of an issue". A range of wider recommendations falls into the category that should be looked at as part of the wider picture of the independent review of education. The position is that the call for those who wished to put their names forward as potential panel members closed on 26 March. There was a significant response to that call, and those responses are going through a sifting process. A panel will then interview to determine who is to be appointed. Most aspects of education are interconnected.”
“I appreciate the level of pressure that is there. As part of the overall finance structures for next year, additional money will be made available to support pupils' emotional health and well-being. Again, there will be opportunities within schools to deliver that support.”
“I will disaggregate that into a couple of answers. First, provision has been made available for assessments. However, in relation to qualifications, the concept is that the assessments are to be evaluated by the school. The assessments are not compulsory, and the school can use any evidence from the period in question. The advice from not only the Department of Education but CCEA — we should appreciate that not every examination or qualification in Northern Ireland is through CCEA — is that, where assessments are being used, there should be only one assessment per subject. Some schools have gone well beyond that. Schools have autonomy and are being asked to provide their own information, assessment and evaluation. Some schools have gone further than what was suggested; others felt there was no particular need for that.”
“I thank the Member for her question. As she is aware, what was previously awarded in 2020 does not count towards 2021. I hope to be in a position in the next few weeks to make an announcement around the wider picture of the exact structure of examination grades in 2022. We are still working with CCEA, and we will work closely with stakeholders in schools. I anticipate that we will reach a final position in the next few weeks. From that point of view, I am not in a position to unpick that announcement at this stage or to give specifics about individual elements of it. I hope to make that clear within the next few weeks.”
“We will continue to push in that regard. There are public health concerns, and there is the question of getting support from the Department of Health. I will certainly not be any sort of barrier to that. Where there are very young children, whether in schools or in Sure Start, there is very little risk of transmission. As well as that, the value of the intervention probably outweighs any level of risk. In schools or in Sure Start, the bigger danger is in adult-to-adult transmission. That will be a slightly higher hurdle to overcome. As we move towards gradually easing restrictions, that next phase will come, but I do not have a definitive date for it at this stage.”
“As part of its programmes, Sure Start will also look at the level of its engagements with adults and parents, because that is where there is a greater risk from a public health point of view, as opposed to with very young children. As such, we have not been able to give the green light to those engagements. It is about a phased restart, but the Executive have agreed a full restart of all child-centred activities. That is particularly important, given that Sure Start is largely focused on areas with higher levels of social deprivation. The damage that was done, unfortunately, was as a result of some of the provisions that had to be put in place, but, at least, we are starting to reverse those.”
“As part of that, we are trying to balance the important provisions that are made by Sure Start and by generic youth work, for instance, with making sure that they are compatible with public health requirements. As such, while the focus tends to be on the youth side, a paper was put to the Executive on the restart of those facilities, which was passed before Easter, and Sure Start has been given a green light. All child-centred activities, which are the bulk of what Sure Start does, have been given a green light to fully restart. Obviously, those Sure Start projects will operate where they can within mitigations and protections. <BR /> <BR />There is one outstanding area at present in relation to Sure Start.”
“Similarly — we are waiting for final allocations and a paper will be put in — there have been indicative COVID allocations. Over the summer, as well as what is happening, broadly speaking, in youth work, the intention is to enable schools, on a voluntary basis, to be funded for one, two or three weeks, depending on what they want to do, for a summer school of learning. Given some of the pressures that exist, many schools will simply say that it is better for their pupils and staff to have a bit of time off over the summer, which is perfectly understandable. However, opportunities will be provided for schools to apply flexibility so that they can focus on pupils and on the level of provision that they want.”
“The flexibility is largely given to schools to spend their allocated money according to the intervention that they want to put in place. In the Irish-medium sector, there is flexibility so that, if they want to focus that on lost language learning, that can be progressed.”
“Part of it is about the adaptation of resources that will be provided to the sector, across all schools and the sector as a whole. This year, we had some interruptions. We moved ahead with the Engage programme. There was some disruption to Engage in the spring term, from January to April, because schools were not open physically. However, we have been able to roll the funding over for the rest of the academic year. The aim is — there has been indicative support — to roll COVID funding for 2021-22 forward into the next academic year. I have yet to get a final paper signed off by the Executive. The aim of it is to provide schools with funding to help with catch up. <BR /> <BR />I always take the view that it is not for me or the Department to dictate from on high exactly how that should be spent.”
“We pride ourselves on having a large pool of substitute teachers, but we have found that, at times, it has not been quite as deep in numbers as we thought. It is important that, as we move ahead with the substitute list and General Teaching Council (GTC), there should be a much greater level of accommodation for those, for instance, from outside this jurisdiction, whether it is in the Irish-medium sector or —.”