Michelle McIlveen
Strangford · Democratic Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“Public confidence depends not only on effective enforcement but on enforcement being exercised fairly and consistently. <BR /> <BR />There is widespread concern across Northern Ireland about the condition of many of our lakes and rivers, and there are a vast number of factors that contribute to water quality challenges.”
“Although we support the overall direction of travel, I think that is appropriate to reflect on the concerns that have been raised and ensure that the legislation is proportionate, practical and capable of delivering its intended outcomes.”
“If we are therefore serious about improving our aquatic environment, every source of pollution must be addressed. New legislative powers are meaningful only if the Department has the resources, the expertise and the personnel necessary to implement them effectively.”
“There is, however, a need for accompanying clear guidance and support and for regulatory consistency and prompt decision-making. Delays, uncertainty and excessive bureaucracy will undoubtedly discourage investment and undermine confidence in the sector.”
“Subordinate legislation should not become a substitute for proper democratic accountability. Consultation and engagement must be undertaken before regulations are introduced, and I cannot overstate the need for stakeholder engagement. <BR /> <BR />I will now talk about the Bill's proposed enforcement powers.”
“The DUP broadly welcomes the Bill. As has been said, it provides an opportunity to modernise legislation that, in some areas, has remained largely unchanged for decades. The Bill strengthens the protection of our fisheries, improves the regulatory framework for aquaculture and enhances the management of our water environment.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,597 lines we hold for Michelle McIlveen, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 13 of 52.
“As Minister of Education, it is my responsibility to ensure, within budget constraints, that that essential capital investment is facilitated as far as possible. My announcement today will permit a further programme of major works to advance in planning and support the delivery of modern, fit-for-purpose schools. <BR /> <BR />Since 2012, 75 projects have been announced to advance in planning under the major capital works programme. Each project represents an individual programme that requires the significant investment of time and money to plan and deliver. That includes time to identify and secure sites, progressing through the design and statutory planning stages, procurement, and, of course, ensuring best value for the public purse, within approved budget envelopes, throughout.”
“Such investment is essential in order to provide the first-class educational experience that our pupils, staff and wider school communities deserve and need to ensure that our young people can achieve their full potential.”
“My Department is responsible for the planning, management and delivery of a fit-for-purpose schools estate that is both viable and sustainable in the context of the sustainable schools policy and the outworking of area planning. In that context, I will make a statement regarding my major capital investment plans for the schools estate. <BR /> <BR />I have visited many schools and witnessed at first hand not only the tremendous work that takes place in each and every school but the need for an appropriate level of investment in the fabric of our schools, whether that is a new building, the extension and refurbishment of existing school buildings or a programme of smaller-scale minor capital works.”
“The aspiration of many to achieve a single education system will not be achieved by this Bill. This Bill reinforces sectorisation. I strongly encourage Members to vote against it and allow the issues to be considered properly through the independent review of education, as agreed by all parties around the Executive in NDNA, perhaps this time taking proper account of the legal advice that, time after time, has shone a spotlight on the fundamental flaws in the Integrated Education Bill. You will be putting children first if you vote against the Bill.”
“He had the opportunity to do that today, and he failed.”
“Unfortunately, the Integrated Education Bill should be about bringing people together, but clearly that is not the case as a consequence of what is being presented to us today. <BR /> <BR />I have been a Member of the House for 15 years, and I would like to think that, during all that time, I have taken my duties as a legislator extremely seriously. It is a privilege to be associated with good law that makes a genuine difference to the lives of those whom we represent. I am astounded to hear contributions from those who plan to go through the Lobby to support the Bill acknowledge its failings. That is quite shameful, and it is an abuse of privilege. I was quite fascinated by Mr Beattie's contribution. He talked about panic in the sectors and about stopping to take time to address the issues. I totally agree with him.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. It is not unsubstantiated rhetoric; it is fact based on legal advice. The choice is in the hands of Members in the House today. The legacy of the Bill will not be a positive one for any school in any sector. We have a means of exacting educational change in a cohesive and constructive way where every voice has an equal chance to be heard, and that way is through the independent review of education. That is the alternative that Mr Sheehan is looking for. This Bill is already causing division around the area planning table. Relationships that have been built up over a decade are at risk of being weakened, and that is before the Bill becomes law. Everyone who votes for the Bill today is contributing to that, and it is our children who will be affected.”
“The only way in which to protect integrated education today is, ironically, to vote against the Integrated Education Bill. That is a fact that is based on legal advice. I do not consider that any integrated school will thank you for imposing this legislation on them. I do not see how any integrated school can operate effectively for the benefit of the children in its classrooms if Members vote the Bill through. Choose to listen to the informed argument today or not. That is the legacy that will be felt if the Bill is voted through today.”
“Some of those schools are enquiring about transformation without even being aware that a full guide, titled 'Integration Works', exists to support transformation. How is that evidence of demand for integrated education? <BR /> <BR />I ask this again: why are development proposals being championed by the statutory support body that is funded to promote and encourage integrated education focused on preschool instead of on identifying and bringing forward proposals for primary and post-primary provision if such demand is not being met? <BR /> <BR />If Members have equated voting for the Integrated Education Bill with supporting integrated education, the legal advice that is telling us all what the impact will be for integrated schools shows how wrong that sentiment is.”
“The fact is that, bar absolutely unsustainable schools, development proposals for transforming schools have been approved. The fact is that, unless there are alternative integrated places available, temporary variations for integrated schools are approved. There is an existing duty on the Department to encourage and facilitate the development of integrated education, and that is leading to increased places in the sector, even though 3,000 places remain unfilled. There is a body that has been funded since its inception to promote and encourage integrated education. Why, then, is a pattern emerging of schools seeking to transform to integrated status only after a development proposal for their closure has been published?”
“If we take that to mean that grant-maintained integrated schools should access human resource advice, legal advice etc through the EA, that, at a minimum, requires the factors in the common funding formula that are currently provided to those schools to support such costs to be removed from them. In short, that provision in the Bill removes funding from grant-maintained integrated schools. I hope that the Bill sponsor has made them aware of the outworkings of clause 9(2)(c). <BR /> <BR />I could make so many more points. The fact is that 3,000 places are available in our integrated schools and that 60% of them are not oversubscribed. The fact is that, over the past 10 years, the vast majority of development proposals for primary and post-primary integrated education have been approved to support the growth of the sector.”
“Voting it through is a dereliction of duty that is in stark contrast to providing proper stewardship of public funding. The Bill seeks to ensure:”
“<BR /> <BR />Those requirements come at real cost. They come on top of existing legislation that already enables the Department to encourage and facilitate the development of integrated education and on top of existing legislation that enables NICIE to promote integrated education. Those resources will come out of an Education budget that, as I have told the House, faces a shortfall of around £735 million over the next three years. I have told the House that the programmes that make a real difference to the lives of children from all sectors and all communities will fall behind the statutory costs of delivering the Bill. <BR /> <BR />I am not playing around with words here. The pressures that the Bill will bring are real and costly. There is no additional funding coming with it.”
“The Bill requires that sufficient places be provided to aim to meet that unspecified demand and that data be collected on catchment areas, which do not exist in Northern Ireland, but, where school admissions have operated under an open enrolment policy, there is a bizarre range of consultation requirements at various stages outside existing strategic planning for education. The Bill requires an integrated education strategy to include provisions for resources for integrated education and to quantify and identify such resources for integrated education, including resources to establish new integrated schools, to expand integrated schools and to transform schools into integrated schools. Where does the Bill sponsor think that such resources will come from if not the finite Department of Education budget?”
“How can one aim to meet demand in 60% of integrated schools in which there are empty desks and thus no demand?”
“It sets targets and benchmarks that must then be reported on and monitored but completely ignores outcomes for our children. How the term "aiming to meet the demand" is to be defined or determined is not specified, but the Department and the EA must still aim to meet it.”
“If oversubscribed integrated schools were to take everyone who applied to them, even though some of the applications have been driven by the school, such as through the inclusion of a first preference criterion in their admissions criteria, how long would it be before that school's physical infrastructure became insufficient? How long would it be before that school's teaching complement became insufficient? How long would it be before neighbouring schools in other sectors tipped into unsustainability? How long would it be before the educational quality across all schools, including integrated schools, started to deteriorate? <BR /> <BR />The impact of the Bill comes from, for example, how "support" is defined in the Bill.”
“Putting it frankly, if the Bill passes into law, Members of the House will have removed the ability of any Minister of Education to deploy impartial and objective stewardship of the education budget. <BR /> <BR />Regardless of party politicking about an extended Committee Stage, the legislation is being rushed through with no regard for the far-reaching consequences that it will have for the entire education system or for the reality of how it will operate to the detriment of integrated schools and the impact that it will have on every other type of school. <BR /> <BR />To bring the financial argument back to funding following a child, it is disingenuous for every primary or post-primary school to receive the same age-weighted pupil unit per child.”
“I have had the ministerial code quoted at me. That code is not in place to have elements picked and chosen depending on the circumstances. It clearly requires every Minister to”
“Whilst I am sure that the maintained sector appreciates those words, they are not backed up by action, given his party's staunch support for the Integrated Education Bill to date. <BR /> <BR />Mr O'Dowd started his scrutiny of the Bill at Second Stage by saying that he found clause 1, which is the same clause 1 as he and his party voted through at Consideration Stage, to be offensive to him”
“I can point to many research sources that state that, when a parent chooses a school for their child, the quality of education is, first and foremost, what drives their decision-making. In almost all research, the sector is non-existent or is the least important factor in parents' consideration. <BR /> <BR />At Second Stage, Mr Sheehan said:”
“Reasonable class sizes are needed to assist the learning of all of children in the classroom. That is why, in the area planning priorities, my predecessor and I agree that reviewing composite classes of three year groups or more, reviewing small and unsustainable sixth forms, maintaining high-quality education provision in rural areas and working together to bring forward collaborative area-based solutions are important and necessary steps to protect and enhance the quality of the education that is available for all our children. <BR /> <BR />The quality of educational provision that our children receive matters. It should matter much more than it does in the Bill. The Bill is silent on educational quality.”
“If the myth that the Bill does not elevate integrated education above all other sectors and does not impact on other schools were indeed true, why be so afraid of an amendment that stated that that detriment should not exist? Until this point, the Department of Education has never promoted or supported — different word, same definition — any one sector for the good reason that it supports true parental preference. <BR /> <BR />Does the Bill have to be considered in the context of sustainable provision? For the sake of the children in the classroom, of course it does. Does it have to be considered in the context of high-quality education and with an awareness of the cost to the public purse? Again, for the sake of the children in our classrooms, of course it does.”
“That is why I tabled an amendment at Consideration Stage that was about true parental preference with no other objective than to enable the EA to ascertain it. The Bill sponsor objected to that amendment, and, as Hansard attests, she voted against it. Why? If the objective behind the Bill is to establish parental preference, why vote against an amendment that would deliver it? Clause 6 is the Ronseal approach to ascertaining parental preference, whatever type of educational provision that preference might be for. It does what it says on the tin. <BR /> <BR />Equally, the Ulster Unionist Party tabled an amendment at Further Consideration Stage to put in some protection that the Bill could not operate without detriment to other sectors. The Bill sponsor objected to that amendment and voted against it. Why?”
“Despite the contention that Hansard will substantiate that claim, I continue to await the evidence. That evidence will not and cannot be produced, because I have never said that I do not support integrated education. I have never said that I do not support integrated schools. I support all types of school. Far from the vested-interest misinformation that has been bandied about, I support true, parental preference, not the often quoted percentage of broad support for broad principles from a good relations indicator and not the often quoted 21% of children not getting a place in their first preference integrated school. The sad reality for some families in every sector is that they do not obtain a place in their first preference grammar, controlled or maintained school.”
“Legal advice confirmed that that was wrong, and amendments were required. <BR /> <BR />The Bill sponsor stated at Second Stage that the drafter managed to convey in legislative language what she hoped to take forward. Given the extent to which legal advice shows that the Bill will not deliver the Bill sponsor's stated intention, on what basis could the Bill that we will vote on represent good law? The House needs to be assured that what we are considering would represent good law. The legal advice that I have received has highlighted time and again the flaws in the legislation. That position has not changed with the amended Bill that we are considering. <BR /> <BR />I turn to the issue of misinformation and the allegations that have been made in the media, particularly social media, that I am opposed to integrated education.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Bill sponsor stated at Second Stage that the requirements to create or become an integrated school, as set down in the 1989 Order, would not change. Legal advice confirmed that that assertion by the Bill sponsor was wrong, and amendments were subsequently required. She stated that she did not intend new schools to include amalgamations. Legal advice confirmed that that was wrong, and amendments were subsequently required. The Bill sponsor introduced a Bill that required the Department of Education to consult an integrated education body on every function that it undertook, with no link to integrated education being necessary. Legal advice confirmed that that was wrong, and amendments were required. The Bill sponsor introduced a Bill that placed conflicting duties on bodies such as CCMS and spurious duties on CCEA.”
“The Member has been clear that she wants all education together, hence it would not work. I have been clear with the Member that I have sought legal advice on the points that are being made. <BR /> <BR />To go back to the point that I was making, when you look at the impact of the Bill on integrated schools, as well as on every other school in every other sector, it is clear that, ironically, voting against the Bill is the best way to protect integrated education and the overall integrity of our education system. Voting against the Bill is one of the most effective ways to enable the Department of Education to "encourage and facilitate" the development of integrated education.”
“Essentially, it would mean that the school would be acting illegally, unless it could meet the requirements as stated in the Bill.”
“<BR /> <BR />If the House does not respond to the legal position that I am clearly stating today, you are placing a legally unworkable requirement on every existing integrated school and on every school that may otherwise have sought to transform to integrated status. That is your decision today. <BR /> <BR />I will give way to the Bill sponsor and then to Mrs Dodds.”
“If the Member does not mind, I will conclude the point. <BR /> <BR />That is how the Bill will operate in practice, if you vote it through, because it is defective. The Bill is fundamentally flawed. The Education Committee chose not to listen when my officials outlined the problems with the Bill last September. The House has chosen not to take on board the significant concerns about it at Second Stage and every subsequent stage. The House has chosen not to accept the arguments presented when I tabled sensible amendments that would at least have ensured more workable legislation. I was criticised for my decision not to table amendments at Further Consideration Stage.”
“How on earth are integrated schools to provide any meaningful offer at Key Stage 4 and post-16? What parent wishes to limit their child's qualification choice and, therefore, future pathway to such an extent? <BR /> <BR />Let me be clear: that analysis is based on legal advice.”
“I would like to elaborate on the point. That is because the overriding legal requirement for integrated schools will not be about education any longer. It will not be about delivering a broad and balanced statutory curriculum. It will not be about meeting the statutory requirements of the entitlement framework. In case any Member is not aware of it, that requires post-primary schools to offer their pupils access to a minimum of 21 courses, of which a third must be general and a third applied, at Key Stage 4 and post-16. If you vote the Integrated Education Bill into law, the overriding legal requirement for integrated schools now and in the future will be to ensure that every class has the required mix of categories and that they are educated together in the classroom.”
“That is lucky because, as I said at Further Consideration Stage, her Bill will prevent integrated schools from streaming their pupils, whether via partial academic selection or after admitting pupils. If they do that, they will be in contravention of the law. The Bill will effectively end post-primary integrated education as it currently operates and make it practically undeliverable at Key Stage 4 and post-16. That is because —.”
“All integrated schools will need to ensure that their admissions criteria can select pupils down to the last available place on the basis of the new definition. If the Bill becomes law, that will affect admissions and admissions criteria for the 2023-24 school year. As soon as the Bill becomes law, all integrated schools will need to provide evidence to demonstrate how every class meets the new definition. Every development proposal for a new integrated school will have to demonstrate that in its case for change. <BR /> <BR />The Bill sponsor stated at Second Stage that she:”
“Let me spell out what the impact will be for existing integrated schools if the Integrated Education Bill becomes law. No Member who has spoken has considered that, other than Mr McNulty, who referred to it in passing. Every existing integrated school will need to analyse the multifaceted pupil mix in every individual class. Every class will need to educate together:”
“The definition in clause 1 of the final version of the Bill should cause integrated schools great concern.”
“I thank the Member for her intervention. I met the Bill sponsor, as did my officials, on a number of occasions. <BR /> <BR />The Bill sponsor stated that the definition in clause 1 when the Bill was introduced did not cause any issue for existing integrated schools. The definition that was voted through at Consideration Stage was that of the Bill sponsor. I provided an alternative that would have delivered the stated intention of ensuring that other religions and none were part of the legal definition of integrated education. However, that was rejected by the House.”
“— and remains the case in the amended Bill that we are voting on today. I will give way, but I will explain what I have said.”
“In other words, the policy intent as stated is not what the Bill will actually achieve. That was true at the outset of the process —”
“<BR /> <BR />Much has been made of the intention behind the Bill. Rhetoric and unsubstantiated claims have been circulated about how the Bill does not impact on other schools, how it does not elevate integrated education above all other sectors, how it was consulted on and how the new definition of integrated will not cause any problems whatsoever for any integrated school either now or in the future. It is important that I address those claims today with the realities of the outworkings of the Bill. <BR /> <BR />The Bill sponsor introduced the Bill with no consultation on a draft of it. Her consultation from 2016-17 and the policy intent, which was outlined then and subsequently described in the Second Stage debate, will not be enacted through the Bill, as has been highlighted by legal advice time and time again.”
“That the representative bodies felt so strongly about the Bill that they came together to issue such a statement should not be overlooked by those who support the Bill any more than the feelings of practitioners in schools in the other sectors should be overlooked. The Bill's supporters are devaluing the excellent work that the other sectors do with our pupils across Northern Ireland, and that point has been reinforced in comments from Members. I commend Mr McNulty's contribution, as he made that point so well. It cannot be right for us to ignore the very real concerns from the representative bodies or, indeed, those schools. I will take exception on their behalf to the comments that have been presented here today that perhaps they do not understand the Bill. How patronising.”
“As we come towards the end of the Final Stage of the private Member's Integrated Education Bill, there are a few key points that I feel that I must reiterate. I stand by what I have been saying since the Bill's introduction. I support children being educated together. Opposing the Integrated Education Bill, which is a fundamentally flawed piece of legislation, is not opposing integrated education. It is recognised across the House that the Bill is fundamentally flawed legislation. <BR /> <BR />Other Members have referenced that, last week, the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools, the Controlled Schools' Support Council, the Governing Bodies Association, the Catholic Schools' Trustee Service and the Transferor Representatives' Council issued a joint statement opposing the Bill. That is significant.”
“<BR /> <BR />In conclusion, there are many steps already being taken to bring cultural and behavioural change that will positively impact women in agriculture and help them to overcome perceived barriers to their career progression. However, the report shows that there is more that could be done. It is important that DAERA and the industry work together in order to facilitate change through ongoing policy development.”
“<BR /> <BR />I fully endorse the recommendation in the report that organisations across the sector should consider how women can be promoted in communications about new initiatives, policies and projects, and that is important across all industry sectors. It is encouraging to note that DAERA also leads by example in that area of work by highlighting the roles and responsibilities that women have in the agriculture sector. In addition, CAFRE ensures that there is strong female representation across all the communication channels that it uses. Students and alumni are featured regularly studying and working in rewarding jobs and leadership roles.”
“One recommendation in the report, which was launched today and which is very welcome, is that female representation on boards and committees should be increased. It may be the case that awareness training is appropriate for some organisations. However, I note that DAERA is leading by example with 45% of its staff being female. Also, all DAERA staff undertake mandatory unconscious bias training at their induction, and they are also encouraged to complete the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland's (ECNI) online training on section 75 duties. In addition, DAERA staff at CAFRE deliver diversity and inclusion training each year to students in order to reinforce key messages about equality and respect as they study at college and then leave to work in the agriculture industry.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Department's public consultation on future agriculture policy proposals for Northern Ireland closed on 15 February, and DAERA officials are considering the responses that were received. The consultation included policy proposals for future knowledge transfer, innovation programmes for the industry and a generational renewal programme to support and encourage generational change in the industry. The development of programmes in those two policy areas provides an opportunity to address the recommendations that were made in the report, to facilitate enhanced training and education for women in the sector and to promote and encourage succession, regardless of sex. <BR /> <BR />Across the industry as a whole, it is important that individuals and organisations demonstrate the appropriate behaviours of fairness and equality.”
“<BR /> <BR />CAFRE students are the industry leaders and influencers of the future. That changing picture should mean that we begin to see a shift in the demographics as those young people leave college and begin to follow their chosen careers in the agriculture industry. Without doubt, knowledge transfer is critical to improving future performance, sustainability and resilience in the agri-food industry. CAFRE continues to deliver knowledge transfer innovation and technology transfer programmes to people who are already participating and working in the agriculture industry. Whilst female participation in the current suite of programmes is relatively low, DAERA is looking ahead to future programmes and to how that can be changed.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is well known that the local agriculture industry is traditionally male-dominated. The most recent EU farm structure survey, which was in 2016 , showed that 76% of farm workers in Northern Ireland were male, and 24% were female, although the proportion of female managers was just 5%. However, DAERA's College of Agriculture, Food and Rural Enterprise (CAFRE) delivers education programmes to around 1,900 students, and it is positive to know that the number of female students is increasing. <BR /> <BR />CAFRE delivers further and higher education programmes, and, whilst 27% of further education students are female, many of them use their course as a route to progress to higher education. Notably, 54% of CAFRE students studying for foundation or honours degrees in agriculture are female.”
“On this International Women's Day, I welcome the opportunity to participate in today's debate on behalf of Minister Poots, who is unable to attend. <BR /> <BR />The report highlights the need to support women in the agriculture sector. It is a fact that women remain under-represented in the agriculture industry. There are real and perceived barriers to women undertaking a career in farming. That has been well articulated by the Committee Chair and Members. <BR /> <BR />It is important that the industry moves forward in a way that supports and encourages women to take on leadership roles in farm businesses and across the wider sector. It is imperative that future agricultural policy helps to promote and inspire the next generation of farmers, female and male.”