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 52 of 77.
“Absolutely. I do not know whether that means that I have two minutes from this point. <BR /> <BR />One of the problems we have is that there are schools where there is a high dropout rate for pupils once they get into lower sixth. Sometimes that is because it is not the appropriate place for those students. Therefore, a range of work has to take place on the curriculum, particularly focusing on vocational pathways, not simply with the Department of Education, its arm's-length bodies and schools but with the Department for the Economy, colleges and particularly with industry and business. I have met the CBI, for instance, which is keen to be involved in that work. It is something that will have to do be taken forward on a cross-departmental basis and will go beyond the initial conversation and into a great deal more depth as we move ahead.”
“I know that, Mr Deputy Speaker, often in the House it seems that time stands still. At least, from the clock, it seems to have stood still.”
“That is a valid point. This needs to be put into a wider context. When I talk about an overall review of the curriculum, I mean one that will, obviously, go beyond simply the 14-to-19 age range. Issues have been raised with me about the primary school curriculum, issues about languages and the need to have a greater emphasis on STEM. However, the principal focus of curriculum reform will be on the 14-to-19 age range and widening that. I have indicated to a number of people that that discussion needs to take place and needs to be quite detailed. There is a key role not simply for the Department of Education, the schools and the bodies that fall, broadly speaking, within our remit but for the Department for the Economy and the colleges. One of the areas that we need to tackle is area planning.”
“It is about retaining and building; it is not about breaking down what is there. I appreciate that there will be particular circumstances in individual schools. Let us see whether there is a pattern and whether it is simply that providing that would require a level of expenditure that is beyond the schools. As I said, there is a strong case for looking at whether we can provide greater help and assistance for a greater level of sharing. The key element of this will always be what offer is in place to the individual student. The key driver should be to provide the maximum opportunity for the student to follow a range of pathways.”
“Presciently, I am holding discussions with officials at 3.00 pm today to look at the best way forward on the entitlement framework. I am conscious that the entitlement framework has delivered a great benefit to pupils. I am conscious that there may well be a range of reasons why schools fall just short. One of the things that we probably have not done to a sufficient level is explore a bit with those schools why they are falling short. If you are looking for solutions, you need to know the reasons behind things in the first place. Starting that conversation will be critical, and it will be ongoing work. It may mean that, as part of the overall process, we need to find short- to medium-term fixes to rectify situations in the short term while looking at the longer-term position.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is also about seeing what we can do from a practical and sensible point of view. Some of that is sharing. Some of that may be that we are asking schools to stretch a bit too much or whatever. There may be issues around the broader level of funding that could be looked at. All of that has to be in the mix. One of the issues that need to be explored — I am mindful that I have 30 seconds, Mr Deputy Speaker — is that we know that a number of schools are falling below it and we probably need to drill down with those schools to find out why they are failing, whether it is purely a question of finance or whether there are any other barriers. We need to have a bit of discussion with schools to see how we can resolve those issues.”
“Some additional EF funding has gone to schools. I would indicate that there has been significant achievement in reaching a lot of the targets. The figures for complete compliance show that 40% of schools are completely compliant on every section of this. There are also quite large percentages that are doing the individual aspects of Key Stage 4 or post-16. There are 66 schools that are not meeting them in full. Seven of those are because of the mix of applied and general. However, of the 59 others, 51 are meeting between 20 and 23 courses — the target is 24 courses — so there are schools that are just falling short. Each of the seven schools that are failing to meet the target on the mix is falling short by one general course, so the gap to be bridged is probably not that enormous.”
“We need to ensure that credit is given to the schools that now operate with greater levels of partnership and sharing, particularly, in the context of the entitlement framework, on what might be described as minority subjects where there is less direct demand. It may be less cost-effective for a school to provide that in their individual environment. For instance, in my constituency, good work is going on between Bangor Grammar, Bangor Academy and St Columbanus' in providing a shared solution in, in particular, A-level courses as part of shared education. Area learning communities will be vital as well. In delivering and striking the right balance, we must ensure that we get the best possible delivery for all our pupils. Using more imaginative solutions can be helpful to that as well.”
“I agree with the Member. To give the specifics of this, schools are funded through their core delegated budget to deliver the statutory obligations, including the wider curriculum. Of course, the entitlement framework is obviously a major part of that. It very specifically kicks in at Key Stage 4 and the post-16 situation. EF funding has been provided over the last few years, but we need to ensure that a separate stream is not simply a permanent stream and that, as much as possible, we mainstream what is there. That funding, to date, has provided a contribution to the cost of the expanded curriculum. <BR /> <BR />Also, importantly, a number of schools are embracing the key issue, which is what can be delivered to the students themselves, so I will also look at the regulations.”
“If there is action that needs to be taken in the short term, that will be looked at. As I have indicated, it will be opportune in this Assembly term to take a wider look at how we deliver the curriculum. I think that you cannot simply do that by taking the entitlement framework out on a limb and setting it to the side. It is about trying to get the right balance so that we get retention of the best that is there from the entitlement framework without placing what could sometimes be an undue burden on schools.”
“I thank the Member for his question. The entitlement framework (EF) is and will remain a key component of the statutory curriculum, ensuring that all pupils have access to a broad, balanced and economically relevant range of courses. However, as I think I have said previously, I appreciate that there are significant challenges for schools in trying to meet the entitlement framework requirements in full. They are quite ambitious in terms of numbers. In light of that, I am considering the way forward for the entitlement framework policy, including the statutory requirements. However, in doing so, I want to make sure that we retain the benefits accrued to date and try to build on them. I will soon be meeting officials on that. Again, there is probably a two-stage aspect to this.”
“The focus of a lot of that will be on best practice, because, I think, everybody realises that there are tough financial circumstances. Part of it will be disseminating that best practice. I have accepted the invitation to speak at that conference, and I will also have my officials there. There can be that driver. Even taking it at a different level, if there were no financial problems whatever and there was an abundance of money, best practice should still be a key driver. That should be the case no matter what financial position we are in, because I agree with the Member that we should always be ambitious to ensure that we get the best for all our children.”
“With the childcare strategy and the children and young people's strategy, there is an element of things where we will need to look at where we can provide that training and professional development. The Member makes a valid point, and it goes beyond early years and permeates other areas of education. A lot of good things are happening on the ground, and, at times, to get the best delivery, it is a question of, for example, trying to see how we can best explain and, indeed, promulgate that best practice. I know that that has happened in a number of initiatives. Some of that can be disseminated by getting stakeholders together. For example, I have recently accepted an invitation from a group that has been working on underachievement in north Down. It is hosting a conference in February.”
“— but the role of Health. So, yes is the answer.”
“Similarly, the delivery plan for indicator 15 acknowledges the central role and broad range of agencies and services in taking these interventions forward. That comes back to Mr Agnew's point about the need to try to ensure that we have joined-up services because, particularly in dealing with the very young, you are not simply looking at Education —”
“The intervention is vital not only in schools but before children come through the school gates. <BR /> <BR />It is right that the Executive's draft Programme for Government acknowledges early years intervention and provides that opportunity. That is very much in line with outcome 14, which aims to:”
“I add my congratulations to Mourneview. That shows that all politics is local, even for the under-fours. I am sure that the Member is rightly proud of what is happening in Upper Bann. <BR /> <BR />A range of research and evidence points in the same direction, which highlights the importance of early years to children's cognitive, emotional, social and physical growth. It is vital that children who are starting school have been and continue to be prepared, supported and encouraged to learn. I get a consistent message, particularly from primary schools — to some extent, arguments at later stages in life are slightly skewed by this — that some children coming through the door of a primary school are already well behind on a range of cognitive issues and social skills and even using a knife and fork.”
“I entirely understand where the Member is coming from. I suspect that, from a financial or practical point of view, it may create hurdles and difficulties that would be difficult to overcome.”
“I understand the point, particularly on the distribution of housing in Northern Ireland. We have an unusual feature — those small pockets of deprivation — which probably differentiates us from other jurisdictions. To some extent, if that were the case, you would have to change the basis on which the scheme is administered. If you simply added those areas, it would be an additional cost, and there would be controversy if you were using those effectively to replace some of the wards that are there. <BR /> <BR />With Sure Start, projects must have certain economies of scale. You cannot provide Sure Start for three children, for instance. You have to ensure that you have sufficient numbers of under-fours, particularly from disadvantaged areas. If you were to string together some pockets of deprivation, that would create difficulty.”
“It is to try to give a better start to those who come from disadvantaged areas in order to close the gap. At one level, if we were to move to a situation in which that was completely universal, it may be advantageous to every pupil in Northern Ireland but would not have a particular impact on closing any gaps, albeit, objectively, it would be regarded as a good thing.”
“Findings from an independent review of Sure Start, together with existing research, provide assurances that targeting in areas of highest disadvantage is likely to have the greatest impact. <BR /> <BR />The Member indicated that it should be a universal service, and, in an ideal world with a limitless amount of money, it would be. If, using a rough rule of thumb, you were talking about something like Sure Start moving from targeting 25% to having a 100% coverage, given the current level of funding, that would probably mean an increase in cost of somewhere in the region of £70 million to £75 million per year. I think that would be very difficult, in many ways, to achieve. <BR /> <BR />The Member made a valid point about cooperation with Health. There is a large health component, particularly in Sure Start.”
“We have to realise that the Department provides £25 million of investment to Sure Start, which, I think, relates to support for around 40,000 children under the age of four and their families. Obviously, the priority is to ensure that all children reach their full potential. At the moment, Sure Start is a targeted service, and there have been some extensions of it. It is a targeted service that has a distinct geographical remit that is defined by ward boundaries, and I know that can be a slightly blunt tool. What it means is that all those within the catchment areas with children under the age of four can access those services. It was initially on the basis of 20% of the most disadvantaged areas. That has now been extended to 25% of the most disadvantaged areas.”
“<BR /> <BR />I hope to bring forward the full version of the childcare strategy to my Executive colleagues in the coming months having taken account of the many consultation responses received, the Programme for Government and the new opportunities that now exist to align childcare and early years initiatives. I look forward to engaging with Executive colleagues in more detail on the matter in due course. <BR /> <BR />I will also indicate that, when we are looking at an expansion of the universal provision of early years education, the definition of it can cover a multitude of subjects. If there are more specific areas the Member wants to raise in addition to whatever response I am able to give to a supplementary question, I would be happy to engage with him if he wants to drill down into some of them.”
“<BR /> <BR />I also plan to work with other Ministers and key Departments in the delivery of actions within the draft Programme for Government and beyond that are aimed at improving well-being and tackling disadvantage through high-quality early years education and childcare provision. The Department will be engaging on the delivery plan over the next few weeks to help inform the development of the key interventions in the published delivery plan, including extending responsive, quality provision in early childhood education and care initiatives for families with children aged three to four to up to 38 weeks per year.”
“I thank the Member for his question. The Department aims to provide a funded preschool place to every child in their immediate preschool year whose parents want it. In each of the last five years, at least — a minimum of — 99 8% of children whose parents stayed with the preschool admissions process to the end received the offer of a funded preschool place. The aim is reflected in the delivery plan for the draft Programme for Government, which is currently out for consultation, and I intend to ensure that children in their immediate preschool year continue to benefit from access to high-quality, universal early years education provision in the future.”
“Thank you. There are two definitions of rural. There is the specific definition in the sustainable schools policy (SSP), but the motion makes a general reference to rural. In the Northern Ireland Executive and, indeed, the Assembly, rural areas are defined as settlements of below 5,000 people. There is relevance because it is not specifically or purely tied in with the state of schools but goes wider with the protection of rural areas.”
“I am happy to give that assurance. Obviously, as the Member knows, unlike other settings, we cannot simply amend on the hoof, but it is important that there is that proper consultation. <BR /> <BR />Above all, the status quo needs to change from a financial point of view and an educational point of view. The key driver in all of this — there are sensitivities, and we can ensure that consultation takes place — is the needs of our pupils moving forward. We should look to protect the educational interests of pupils, not the educational interests of school buildings. That is the distinction that I will draw between the amendment that has been put before us and the failings, I believe, of the original motion.”
“There will be concerns out there, which is why, as I mentioned in a statement when the area plan was first mentioned in the Assembly, there will be a need to ensure that isolated communities are not simply left too far away from a school. <BR /> <BR />The proposer of the motion mentioned that she did not want children being driven for more than an hour to get to school. There is recognition that there has to be some practical limitation on distance. I am happy to accept the amendment tabled by my colleagues. I have mentioned it previously, and there will need to be some protection for isolated schools, the most obvious example being Rathlin Island, which has already been highlighted. Like other Members, it is an area that I know well, and, with the best will in the world, whatever the mechanics —”
“In the current consultation on the draft area plan and as we move towards annual area plans and individual development proposals, that process will be open to everyone. I encourage everyone to contribute to it. The focus should be on the needs and desires of the community and, particularly, on the pupils. <BR /> <BR />The two amendments are mutually exclusive. I will support the DUP amendment. However, I clearly acknowledge the bulk of what was said by the proposer of the Alliance amendment, and I do not have a problem with it. Its position is much more realistic than that of the motion. I accept that there needs to be sensitivity.”
“The economic aspect is that it is not a question of storing up money to be taken out of schools; it is about the redistribution of money. It is about ensuring, for example, that, if a school is not needed, transferred redundancies will ensure that teachers who want to go can do so, meaning that we teach our children more effectively and efficiently. Therefore, it is about ploughing the resource into the remaining schools. The financial aspect to this is that the system gives too little to schools, and we need to ensure that we get the best possible delivery for that. <BR /> <BR />The process has been mentioned, particularly by the proposer of the Alliance amendment and others.”
“There is no doubt that there are some excellent teachers, principals and schools delivering excellent results for their children. That is why the sustainable schools policy goes beyond a simple numbers game and looks at quality. There is no doubt that having very small schools makes it more difficult for some of our pupils. <BR /> <BR />I cannot deny that there is a financial aspect to this. The teaching cost per pupil in primary schools with fewer than 50 pupils increases by more than 50% when compared with a school of over 100 pupils. This is not driven simply by finance, although we spend £27 million directly on the small schools initiative and another £8 million on principal release, but there is an economic aspect to it.”
“Similarly, it referred particularly to composite classes that spanned more than two years, in which ensuring adequate progression in learning and planning becomes more of a challenge and the opportunities for children to develop socially and emotionally are limited. While the focus has principally been on primary schools, there is a small but significant difference between larger post-primary schools that have more than 500 pupils and smaller schools. There is a clear indication and specific figures show that, for schools with fewer than 105 pupils, there is a statistically significant difference in inspection outcomes. It becomes more pronounced the further down the scale you go. When you get down to 85 or 60 pupils, that has an educational impact. We cannot pretend that that is not the case.”
“From a financial point of view, you cannot get away from the educational side of it. Mention was made of the inspectorate report and I appreciate that it was too late to give a direct response to the Committee Chairperson, Mr McElduff, in relation to that. Again, the report says that larger schools tended to do better in inspections than smaller schools and in primary schools, the specific difference that was highlighted — where it becomes meaningful — is where we move on the question of sustainability.”
“We have rural proofing in every Executive policy and in every motion passed in this House. When it comes to protections, mention was made of what we should be seeking and there, at least, is one thing that I will agree with. We should be looking at a degree of balance. Taking any development proposal in a wider context about sustainable schools, there is that level of balance. However, it is also the case that there are problems with the status quo in terms of the school estate. <BR /> <BR />It has been accepted — I have not heard any particular objections to this — that over the last 10 years, for instance, in net terms, about 100 schools have disappeared in Northern Ireland. There has been an acceptance that something has to be done about the school estate. The case for change is educational and financial.”
“No. I have heard enough from you today. You have given yourself enough rope and I do not want to give you any more. <BR /> <BR />At times, there has been a range of selective quotations in relation to this. Whenever we look at the criteria that are in place, there is criticism of the sustainable schools policy. I will come to that later when I talk about the amendments. The six criteria for assessing a school's viability are as follows: a quality educational experience; stable enrolment trends; a sound financial position; strong leadership and management; accessibility; and strong links with the community. I would simply pose this question: which one of those six criteria is no longer relevant? It is clear that the question is about more than the numbers through the door or the financial position.”
“I would accuse them of wanting to put protection around every school in Northern Ireland so that the school estate does not change. To be fair to them, that is not the position that they have taken. They want to have separate legislative protection for all rural schools, but if this is deemed as something necessary to provide a degree of protection, where is the level of protection for any schools outside rural areas? If you are a pupil in Belfast, Londonderry, Portadown, Ballymena or Magherafelt, the Ulster Unionists and the SDLP are happy on their own terms to simply abandon you. You can operate in a different sphere from that of rural schools.”
“Lessons have been learned from that, and we are now in a situation where, on area planning, there is a representative from every sector around the table. However, it ill behoves those who criticise failures in area planning in the past that, when there is an opportunity for all of us, afresh, to have area planning in which everyone is involved, particularly those from the community, with a completely open consultation, they immediately take steps to scupper it. <BR /> <BR />A number of contributors, particularly the proposer of the Alliance Party amendment, put it very succinctly. This should be about pupils rather than school buildings. The school estate should be there to service the needs of pupils and not the other way around. That is what the proposers of the motion seem to have missed.”
“The debate has also been characterised by a degree of scaremongering, pretending that every rural school is simply going to close and that there are going to be no opportunities for new thinking on that. The word "panic" was mentioned, and I am sure that, as we acknowledged, there is concern, but it has to be said that in the face of that concern there are some who are trying to deal with it maturely and some who are trying to fuel concern and panic and increase scaremongering. The movers of the motion seem to be falling into that category. <BR /> <BR />The missed opportunities in area planning in the past were mentioned. There is condemnation in the first line of the motion of the failure to grasp area planning in an effective manner in the previous mandate, and there is some valid criticism there.”
“However, when I made a statement in the House on this, I made an appeal across the board — it is clear that some have embraced this — that we need to look at this in a mature fashion. Yes, there will be some tough decisions and there will be something that is painful, but, in the same way as there has been a degree of embracing around Bengoa, there is a realisation amongst the vast majority of the Chamber that there is a wider strategic direction that needs to be taken. It is the same with area planning. Therefore, it is very disappointing that that mature response has not been met by the proposers of the motion. Even before the consultation on the draft area plan has concluded, they have rushed to prejudge it and talk about a raft of closures and put up the stockade as regards the status quo.”
“Relatively early on in her speech — I hope that I quote her correctly — she said, "I do not understand". I agree with her: she clearly does not understand. Most obviously, shown by her intervention on autonomy, in which she complained that I had written to schools asking for their views on autonomy and then complained that it was vague because it did not tell them what autonomy they should be getting. Now, if Members do not see the irony in that then, perhaps, it is no wonder that this motion has gone so astray. <BR /> <BR />On the process of area planning — it should be made clear, and to be fair to the SDLP they referred correctly to the Education Authority plan rather than the Department plan.”
“I perhaps find myself in the unusual position — following on from the last Member — that quite often in the House when we have new Members there is a maiden speech that has to be dealt with. I do not know if that was a valedictory speech on behalf of the Member opposite. I met the Member recently on the issues around Colin. Obviously, I am not going to talk directly on this. It would be inappropriate for me to talk about individual schools, although I will wait, perhaps, to see an imaginative proposal from Mr McPhillips who will, maybe, be having a merger between Brollagh and Helsinki in the future. The limits of imagination are not constrained in the House. <BR /> <BR />I will start with a note of consensus. I might come down to a second item later, but there is at least one item that I agree on with the proposer of the motion.”
“The whole point is that the proposals come from them.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. She may not be aware of this, but, a couple of weeks ago, I wrote to all schools in Northern Ireland to ask whether they desired greater autonomy and for their views on the bureaucratic burdens that are placed on them. Essentially, the idea was to ask them what they would want with that greater level of autonomy. The Member may be a little behind the times when it comes to what is already happening.”
“You will get an extra minute. <BR /> <BR />The Member mentioned having more than two year groups in a class, and there is the direct reference in paragraph 34 of the ETI report to that, which specifically highlights that composite classes spanning more than two years can be much more challenging for the teacher and limit opportunities for children to develop socially. So there is a degree of evidence, particularly when we are talking about where it goes beyond two year groups.”
“<BR /> <BR />I welcome this debate and all the positive contributions that we have heard. I will reflect on Members' comments as I develop my plans. Given the amount of agreement around the Chamber, I suspect that this issue may not lead the news tonight or feature on tomorrow morning's radio programmes. Maybe society is a bit the worse for that. However, I welcome what has been said. I have visited a number of nurture units, and I will do that on a continual basis. The only word that properly describes the difference that nurture makes to children's lives is "transforming." I believe that nurture classes have much more to offer our education system. <BR /> <BR />I am happy to endorse the motion and amendment No 2. I commend them to the House.”
“<BR /> <BR />There is universal provision in the preschool admissions process, where we have about 99·8%, but I appreciate the point that we need to ensure that provision is there for the families that could most benefit from it. While wider nurture provision can only be helpful in adding to the mix of services, nurture groups are an important intervention in their own right. On that basis, it may not be ideal to tie the two together. <BR /> <BR />Both amendments have worthy intentions, but they are mutually exclusive, so the House can adopt only one or the other. From that point of view, amendment No 2, which stands in the names of members of the SDLP, is very much in the spirit of the original motion. It follows the direction of travel that I want to go in, so I am happy to support it.”
“I agree with a lot of what Mr Agnew said. That is the second time today, so I am a little worried. Whether that should worry him more than me, I do not know. I have some concerns, however, about the wording of his amendment. I cannot remember who made the point that a separate motion dealing with early years intervention might be a better way of dealing with it directly. I very much recognise the importance of early intervention. However, to tie that in directly with some belief that it will lead to a reduction in the need for nurture units is probably the wrong approach. There is not quite the same level of nexus.”
“Yes. I will not ask whether the Member is intending to do that. <BR /> <BR />The projects receive specialist support. In future, that resource will be extended to any school that wants to consider a whole-school nurturing approach. It is also not simply about the schools that we provide the direct support and funding to but about ensuring that the experience is rolled out. Whatever the constraints, that will enable the benefits of nurture to be felt much more widely. There is still significant work to be undertaken, but I intend to bring forward plans for a new nurture programme next year and to have additional nurture groups operational by 2018-19. <BR /> <BR />I turn now to the two amendments. Amendment No 1 talks about the need to recognise the role of early years interventions in reducing the need for nurture units.”
“To be fair, the schools that have embraced nurture have very much taken that mainstreaming attitude. There is an issue about mainstreaming in the budget; there is also an issue about mainstreaming in the schools. I was reflecting the fact that there is a commonality of approach. For instance, schools have a sort of quiet room, which might not be a bad idea for us to adopt at Stormont.”
“<BR /> <BR />Several Members commented on the need to extend the reach of nurture provision as broadly as possible. One of the things that struck me very much when visiting schools was that the nurture unit is not just for the children who are directly involved; it creates a whole-school model. That will also be part of any future programme.”