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 69 of 77.
“Further to that, the Bill includes provisions that transfer rights in respect of SEN and disability from parents to children who are over compulsory school age. While it is true that there were some reservations about that, the Committee received assurances that regulations would specifically support and permit children to receive help from their parents in making a SEN or disability claim. The Committee awaits with interest regulations specifying how the capacity of a child is to be determined to exercise those new rights in a meaningful way. Members also noted that the provisions may provide some benefit to looked-after children where social services, as the de facto parent, fail to properly represent the child's interest.”
“Indeed, the stakeholders who presented to us communicated most eloquently and helped to influence the Committee's choice of proposed amendments <BR /> <BR />Before I come to the specifics of the amendments, I want to make a few remarks, as Chair, on the other provisions of the Bill. The Bill introduces a requirement for the Education Authority to take into account the views of children in respect of their SEN provision. The Committee welcomed that idea for a few different reasons and even considered amendments that would guarantee children the right to speak at SEN tribunals. The Committee was dissuaded from that course and accepted assurances that the Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal (SENDIST) would, in any event, generally always accept evidence from children.”
“It is not always possible to receive oral evidence on an issue such as this, which touches so many groups and individuals, from every organisation that makes a submission, even when the Committee Stage is subject to extension. I assure all our stakeholders that we study their views and suggestions, whether written or oral, carefully and give great value to the Committee Stage. I would also like to thank the Department for its cooperation, particularly in responding to queries and for the way that it shared its early drafts of the regulations on a without-prejudice basis. That was important. I think that the Committee would agree that a number of our stakeholders demonstrated a significant and unique insight into SEN issues. As MLAs, we are, ultimately, generalists in our nature, so it was very helpful to get that.”
“During the Committee Stage of the SEND Bill, members considered written evidence from 32 organisations and undertook nine oral evidence sessions and 16 formal meetings. Deliberations were also informed by a stakeholder event and an informal stakeholder meeting. Additionally, the Department provided sight of indicative draft regulations, some of which are referenced in the SEND Bill and others that relate to future changes to the statementing process. <BR /> <BR />I would like to take this opportunity to thank the many stakeholders who wrote to the Committee, gave oral evidence or attended our health/education cooperation event.”
“Although children with SEN are, of course, at the forefront of our minds, the Committee is also keen to see that the Bill helps parents to get satisfaction from what has been, up to now, an often inconsistent and confusing statementing process.”
“Many parents place their faith in the SEN assessment and statementing process and then come to a representative organisation, or even to their local MLA, when things appear to go wrong. Many complain about a complex process, with poor coordination and lack of communication between education and health providers of SEN services. <BR /> <BR />The Department advised that one of the objectives of the framework, though not necessarily the Bill, is to reform and improve the SEN assessment process. The Department also advised on measures it is adopting to enhance its cooperation with other providers of SEN services, including the health and social care trusts. I believe that that goes very much to the heart of much of today's debate.”
“Throughout all our deliberations, however, the Committee kept at the forefront of its consideration the objectives of the framework and the impact of the proposed legislation on children with special educational needs and disabilities. That has to remain the House's primary focus. <BR /> <BR />As we discussed at Second Stage, the number of children with SEN appears to be increasing. That provides challenges to schools, in terms of early identification and capacity building among teachers. It provides challenges to the Education Authority, in terms of a growing resource demand and the need for a consistent SEN support package; and it provides challenges to the Department, in providing a coherent policy framework. For Committee members, these challenges seem to be very real and are felt very acutely by parents.”
“Indeed, I think it has been accepted that the earlier the intervention, the better the educational outcomes, and, indeed, the better the level of support, the more efficiently we can do that. As part of the framework, there is also a desire to reduce bureaucracy, which is sometimes easier said than done; to build on the capacity of educators, and to take into account the views of pupils and parents. Sometimes, there can be tension between those two. <BR /> <BR />There were many in-depth and complex exchanges during the Committee Stage. We were faced with a welter of background material, and there were detailed policy documents to consider. There were even some innovative suggestions and hotly contested points of principle.”
“So, we may be, inadvertently, making a little bit of history here today. Maybe that reflects the importance of the subject. It may be a little bit early to offer congratulations either to the Committee or, indeed, to the Minister, but I think that it is certainly worthy of note. Indeed, if all goes well today, I am sure that the Committee and the Minister might even be tempted to have a go at another couple of Consideration Stages before the end of the mandate. We shall have to test that out. <BR /> <BR />As I have already indicated, this important Bill supports the revised SEN and inclusion framework. The Department has assured the Committee that the objectives of the framework are as follows: to maintain an inclusive ethos within schools; to ensure timely identification and assessment of SEN support, and to support early intervention.”
“Consideration Stage, in particular, gives the Committee the opportunity to amend the legislation and, indeed, try to get it right. It will come down, more or less, to where there is disagreement in principle — and perhaps in practice, particularly with amendment No 8, but I will come to that later. <BR /> <BR />This is an important Bill that will support the revised special educational needs and inclusion framework. As I understand it — and the Minister may be in a better position to confirm it than me, as I am a little bit newer to this — this may be the first time that any Education Bill's Committee Stage has been followed by a Consideration Stage. We have tended to fall into one of two categories: either there has had to be accelerated passage or a Bill has been killed off at some stage.”
“I am very happy to speak at the Consideration Stage of Bill, initially as Chair of the Education Committee. I will pick up initially on a point that the Minister made, and I think it is one of the dilemmas for all of us when dealing with the Bill. Understandably, the nature of the SEND Bill lends itself, by necessity, to a greater level of subordinate regulations and, indeed, to a detailed code of practice. This is not simply an attempt by the Department to push a lot of it further down the line, as is sometimes the case with different Departments; the detail, by necessity, has to be there. This is about trying to strike a balance between giving adequate space for that detail and putting in sufficient safeguards.”
“Further to that point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker, without making any challenge to the Chair, will you confirm that there were Members who were not called to speak in the debate who were higher on the list than some who were called?”
“No, that is not right. There were at least three.”
“Given that, at the heart of it, there seems to be a lack of confidence in levels of progression as a means of assessment; when the Minister talks about an evolving situation, is one of the bits of evolution that has to occur an examination of alternative means of assessment as we move forward?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. It also maybe shows a little bit of economic illiteracy on the part of those who proposed the motion. We are talking about £30 billion, which is essentially capital spend over a 50-year period, yet this seems to be just simply directly applied in some sort of mishmash of capital and resource schemes as though you can simply apply capital money in the same way to resource issues. They are all very worthy causes, but they are not just a direct read-across, as the Members opposite seem to believe.”
“Does the Member agree with me that, if directly after the election in May 2016 we have to have another Assembly within a month, we will have a lot more to worry about than whether there are five seats or six seats?”
“Above all, irrespective of the arguments about a particular set of numbers, is the fact that in 'A Fresh Start', we made an agreement — I appreciate that it does not bind the Members who tabled the motion — to try to take things forward for all the people of Northern Ireland, as we did with the Stormont House Agreement that involved compromises for everybody, and we did not necessarily get what we wanted. We will be a party of integrity. We will stick to what we have signed up to in 'A Fresh Start'. The motion runs contrary to what is in that agreement.”
“No: I have given way once and have only a short time. <BR /> <BR />It is said that the most dangerous thing is to try to leap a chasm in two leaps. We are committed to our position. Our belief is that it makes sense that, if we are going to make changes, we should make them at the same time, and they would, therefore, take effect from the election after next. By then, the Boundary Commission will have put in place its review, and we will all take our chances with it.”
“I suspect that, as tends to be the case in these things, there will be swings and roundabouts: in some areas, it will benefit you; in other areas, it will not. <BR /> <BR />It strikes us that the appropriate and best time to do that is when we can take what would be two changes — the reduction from six seats to five and the potential change to the number of parliamentary constituencies, which may yet be effected by way of change to the electoral register in England —”
“The principal reason is probably twofold. Boundary changes have been mentioned. In the spirit in which we adopted the changes to the departmental structures, there was at one stage — I am sure that the recently departed Mr Farry would acknowledge that perhaps we would not have had the same debate had this happened earlier — a midterm proposal to abolish DEL. The feeling was that we needed to come up with a system to which there was no particular emotional attachment or, indeed, party advantage or attachment. The position now is that we will face a review by the Boundary Commission, which is uncertain about the number of seats that there will be. There is no advantage or disadvantage to any party in the Chamber from facing the Boundary Commission because no one knows whether the outcome will suit any particular party.”
“Unlike some of the Members opposite, we are walking the walk, rather than simply talking the talk.”
“Rather than simply tabling a motion, we committed ourselves directly to legislation.”
“The cynic in me might suggest that the Alliance Party is grandstanding slightly on the issues that it feels might be numerically to its advantage. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the fact that there has been some consensus about the size of the Assembly and five-Member constituencies. We have advocated that as a party for a long time. We indicated that the contents of the Stormont House Agreement were a compromise between all parties, as was 'A Fresh Start'. At the time of the Stormont House Agreement, we felt that it should be four-Member constituencies. We believed that what existed was going too far, but we accepted the compromise. From that perspective, as I said, we took what was at Stormont House, and we now have legislation that is being proposed via 'A Fresh Start'.”
“One feels that the right place for a debate and a resolution was in the talks process. It would have been a little bit strange had the issue, which is germane to the talks process, hit the original timetable, been introduced in the middle of the talks process and debated on the Floor. <BR /> <BR />I take the proposer's moral high ground with a pinch of salt. We are told that the Alliance Party is happy enough with five-Member constituencies. One may come to the conclusion that five Members in the current boundaries may suit the Alliance Party, but it would be a dreadful attack on democracy if we were to move to a four-seater, even though the proposer indicated that three- and four-seaters were commonplace elsewhere.”
“In my contribution, I will try to avoid straying into the area of holier than thou, because others in the Chamber may have a certain monopoly on holiness on these issues. While it is perfectly within the rights of any party to select whatever motion they want — I certainly defend their right to do that, irrespective of the subject — I was somewhat bemused to see this motion. Had it not been for complications with the timescale, the debate on the motion could have happened last week or the week before. Why am I bemused? First, the issue was largely settled in the Stormont House Agreement, and, secondly, it was a key subject matter in the current round of talks. It was raised on numerous occasions and was directly on the agenda and raised by the Secretary of State as a topic to which all parties were available.”
“I welcome the Minister's response and the work that has been ongoing between his Department and local stakeholders, particularly the local council. What is the anticipated timescale for the start of the project?”
“It seems remarkable that that burden would not be placed on the University of Ulster but would be placed on those groups. We want to see those solutions, and we want to see an acknowledgement of the mistakes that have been made in the past and something concrete that shows that they are not going to perpetuate into the future.”
“I think that, ultimately, people want to see solutions around the issue of the amount of money that is owed, we want to see solutions around vouching and verification, and, indeed, we want to see a sensible approach taken to qualifications. <BR /> <BR />In a previous existence 20 years ago, I did nine weeks' lecturing at the University of Ulster. I had no particular teaching qualifications.”
“We see the extent to which organisations have been staring into the mouth of insolvency, and we see the level of stress from those who are delivering the programmes. They are faced with constant worry and, I suspect, many sleepless nights, and members and employees are often stressed because they know that they cannot meet the financial and moral obligations that are in front of them. That is something that I do not believe anybody should be put through. <BR /> <BR />We are about to be addressed by the Caesar of the Department, Minister Farry. Unlike Mark Antony, I do not come either to bury him nor, indeed, quite clearly, to praise him on this issue.”
“They have suggested things that would make it impossible for some of the organisations that are delivering on the ground and create a situation that could leave them legally vulnerable. What I have seen at times from the Department is a lack of understanding of the constraints on behalf of voluntary and community organisations, a suggestion of things that are not helpful and a lack at times of a degree of blue-sky thinking. <BR /> <BR />It is also the case that there is a very human side to this. Those of us who have worked with many of the groups affected will see this not just as a form of statistics or even some sort of group of administrative errors, but we see the human dimension of this being delivered on the ground.”
“The assessment process, as the Committee Chair indicated, had to be rerun, and mistakes were made by the Department. Mentioned has been made about the position of Europe, and there had to be reprofiling in the Department to be able to cope with that. <BR /> <BR />In each case, I am glad that, at least, the Department took some action, but, again, it is symptomatic of a problem. If you are constantly having to do a degree of catch-up and trying to cover the basis of the mistakes that have been made and rectify those problems, really the target should be to try to make sure that those problems do not happen in the first place. <BR /> <BR />My experience has also been that, even when solutions have been suggested by the Department, at times, some of those solutions have not been fit for purpose.”
“Perhaps wearing another hat as Chair of the Education Committee, I will say that, at times, we look at education within a very narrow prism, and we assume that this is only what happens in the school classroom between the ages of four and 18. However, there is a vast society out there that needs that level of help, expertise and support. The women's sector, in particular, and Kilcooley, very specifically, has provided that down the years. Countless women have been able to benefit from that, and that is to be commended. <BR /> <BR />Good work has been delivered on the ground by the women's centres and other organisations, but that has been fatally undermined by a catalogue of errors in the administration of it. There is no time to go over the full list, but it has been mentioned by others.”
“I am speaking very much from personal experience. First, it is important to place on record, as others have, the tremendous work that the community and voluntary sector is doing out there. My own experience has been very directly with the women's sector in particular, and, specifically, with the excellent work of the Kilcooley women's education group.”
“I support the motion, but I have a degree of mixed feelings about it. What do I mean by that? I very much welcome the motion that has been brought forward by the Committee. I also commend the Committee's proactive approach to the issue and the extent to which it has pushed it. So, I have no problems with that. My degree of mixed feelings comes from the fact that, in an ideal world, we should not have to have this motion in the first place. There has been a catalogue of errors that should have been avoided and, therefore, there should have been no need for this motion. <BR /> <BR />I am perhaps the first Member to speak in the debate who is not a member of the Employment and Learning Committee. Therefore, I cannot bring the same level of expertise or knowledge from the Committee to this motion as others have.”
“I will try to keep my question a bit shorter than the previous one. I thank the Minister for her statement. It is notable that those who, not that long ago, were deriding this budgetary process as a "fantasy Budget" are, today, faced with the realities of additional resources for health, education and DRD. Specifically on the issue of education, can the Minister outline how the additional funding for education will maintain and improve schools, and not just in the constituency of North Down?”
“I am glad that, even in his speech, the Member is willing to acknowledge that, 50 years from now, we will still be in an Assembly in, obviously, a partitionist state. Clearly, even within 50 years, there will not be a united Ireland.”
“How does he intend to cope with those issues of comparability, and how does he intend to keep the system under review so that, if problems arise, changes can be made?”
“I also welcome the fact that he is striving to avoid any level of confusion by ensuring that letters are simply retained rather than there being a mixture of letters and numbers. However, I still have concerns about comparability and portability. Will the Minister advise how he intends to take forward the issue that has been raised of a GCSE C here being considered as a 4 in England when employers in England may be seeking a 5 or above? Similarly, the A* here may well be regarded as being the equivalent of an 8 in England, thus potentially denying students in Northern Ireland the equivalent of the highest possible grade in England — grade 9 — which, again, may act to their detriment.”
“I thank the Minister for his statement to the House this afternoon and for the opportunity for the Deputy Chair and me to receive a briefing from the Department beforehand. Members of the Committee feel that, where there is reform and revision of our examination system, it should focus on ensuring measurable benefit for young people in Northern Ireland by providing high-quality portable qualifications that are easily understood, compared and appreciated by students, employers and further and higher education providers in all jurisdictions. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the Minister's remarks. It is the right decision to retain the alphabetical grading for Northern Ireland.”
“I thank the Member for giving way and agree with the point that she makes. Does she agree with me that, particularly if we are talking about police arriving at an incident where there is a threat to life or a situation where an ambulance is needed — we often talk about the "golden period" around a heart attack, a stroke or something of that nature, where there needs to be swift intervention — the longer that is delayed, the greater the chance of the damage being permanent or, indeed, the person being dead. I suspect that, 99 times out of 100, the ambulance or police car arrives there at the time it is supposed to, but, if you get a situation where there is confusion and people are scrambling around, does she share my concerns that it might, in some extreme cases, be a matter of life and death?”
“In order to make the necessary changes, the Minister has always referred to the need for a transformation fund. Will he advise us whether he envisages that extra income-generation measures will also be required?”
“I have a point that was raised at Committee. Obviously, the definition in the legislation is reasonable numbers of Protestants and Roman Catholics. I suppose, first, there is an issue about how that is defined, and, secondly, the query was on whether two schools from the same sector that may well have some level of mix in them would be able to qualify.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. As has been indicated, there are different views around the Chamber on comprehensive education and academic selection, and those are well trodden. However, the Bill is essentially silent on that. There has been a slight element of educational McCarthyism that sees reds under every bed and some sort of subliminal Marxist agenda — the Minister may well have an overt Marxist agenda — but this is about sharing between sectors. I really fail to see where the difficulty is with trying to share, particularly between those who are in socio-economic deprivation and those who are not. I am not quite sure how this is some amazing pathway to comprehensive education or, as some would have it, some reinforcement of the current system.”
“However, the kind of fantasy problems seen by the Member in the legislation are wide of the mark. He is peddling a completely false premise and completely false fears.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I share in the belief that parents around Northern Ireland see educational improvement as the main objective. Wanting to link in with educational attainment is important, but I have to say that I am somewhat amazed by the leaps that the Member has made. He uses a Trojan Horse analogy. I and the Minister take very different views of selection. This is not some sort of Trojan Horse for comprehensive education or the destruction of the grammars. Rather, if one is to use an analogy, the Member is in the role of Don Quixote tilting at fantasy windmills. Shared education can be of educational benefit: cooperation can lead to dealing with issues of social and educational deprivation and educational underachievement.”
“I am loath to interrupt the school report that the Member is giving the Minister, but, by way of clarification, the Bill talks about "encourage" rather than "promote". Strictly speaking, it is, I suppose, one of the things on which the Minister made clear there may be a divergence of opinion. It does not place an obligation; it places a power, which is of a different nature.”
“I believe that this can improve our education system, improve the opportunities for all our children and improve Northern Ireland, but let us make sure that we get the best possible Bill. That will be the key challenge for the Committee in the few weeks ahead.”
“<BR /> <BR />There are a range of issues for us to look at, and I will come on to a final one in a moment, but it would be churlish of me not to admit that this Bill is a step in the right direction. It is good legislation. The role of the Committee will be to take what is good and debate the ways in which it can be further improved. <BR /> <BR />In conclusion, and I appreciate the position that the Minister has taken, I share the view expressed in the Committee report that we need to look at an obligation, particularly on the higher-level bodies, rather than simply a power. I think that the wording is a little bit weak in that regard, and that is something that we as a Committee will need to look at. I look forward to the Consideration Stage.”
“That is a situation we want to avoid. Moving ahead, this should be focused on clearly agreed methods of assessment. <BR /> <BR />It is also important that we take a curriculum-orientated — indeed, a whole-school — approach to shared education. Flexibility is important. It comes back to balance. Shared education and cooperation between schools will operate in slightly different ways. From the point of view of the DUP — I suspect that the Committee will take a similar view — we do not want that to be tokenistic in its nature. It is not simply a question of two schools ticking a box to receive a level of funding, but that it is very much curriculum-orientated. In doing that, as I said, we have to encompass the full range of possibilities.”
“I suspect that it will be highlighted in this debate that we have reached a situation where a differential approach is taken in different areas of Northern Ireland. Because of the advice they have had, some schools feel confident simply to plough ahead; others are, at the moment, without funding, because they are caught as schools in a degree of dispute between the teaching unions, on the one side, and the Department, on the other.”