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 50 of 52.
“Further to that, can I ask the Minister for his view on the strike action and whether he considers it to be counterproductive?”
“I ask the Minister, in his response, to comment on the portability of applied STEM and other A levels to other jurisdictions, as it has the potential to impose a massive roadblock to the educational progression of our young people. <BR /> <BR />Finally, I would like to make reference to Sentinus. Members were surprised to learn that the organisation, which has a leading role in promoting STEM in schools, is facing a possible significant cut to its budget. Perhaps the Minister will confirm if that is the case, and, if so, can he explain how the decision and the possible loss of match funding fits in with the Success through STEM strategy? At that juncture, I will close my remarks.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee is not suggesting that the Minister reinvent the wheel on STEM education, nor is the Committee suggesting that he presses Ctrl-Alt-Delete and recodes completely the way in which science is taught in schools. Rather, the Committee is calling for the Minister to reflect on the ETI review and the other reports, apply the scientific method of evidence-based decision-making and take the next steps to provide a consistent STEM educational experience for all our children. <BR /> <BR />In closing, I would like to make two additional points. First, Members were concerned to learn that the software systems development A level, as well as other applied A levels, are not recognised by universities in the Irish Republic.”
“Although the Committee welcomes initiatives like IT’s Your Choice: A Computer Programming Continuum for Schools, members felt that there was limited information on current levels of formal and informal computer-coding teaching in schools. There is, therefore, a need for a formal use of baselines on this aspect of learning. This would be only sensible and should pre-empt any further policy decisions on altering the curriculum in this regard. <BR /> <BR />There is clearly good practice and excellent STEM teaching at very many of our schools. Evidence of that was provided last week when, as part of the NI Science Festival, children attempted the largest practical science lesson in the world.”
“The Committee welcomes ETI’s recommendations, including the promotion of science in initial teacher education as well as the use of a baseline of science education in primary schools and better tracking of pupil progression in STEM. <BR /> <BR />As you are aware, the motion also references the CBI's 'Step Change' report and the Engineering UK report, and members agreed with the sentiments of both reports, particularly the recognition of the importance of science subjects and computing at post-primary level and the value of the Success through STEM strategy. Members, however, do not necessarily endorse all the recommendations in those reports. <BR /> <BR />The motion also refers to Momentum's digital strategy action plan. That report highlights the value of learning computer coding in primary schools.”
“ETI found much of what the Committee expected: good practice in many schools but also a lack of definition of science in the curriculum and a need for improved linkages to the levels of progression. ETI also found some suggestion of, if not an overcrowded curriculum, at least some "initiative overload". Members noted with interest suggestions that there tended to be a lack of inquiry-based learning and limited provision of planned opportunities for problem-solving and investigation. ETI found that, despite the good practice, the science and technology strand of the World Around Us is still underdeveloped in 54% of primary schools. <BR /> <BR />Those findings have much resonance with the evidence from the lobby groups that I referred to.”
“<BR /> <BR />The trends in international mathematics and science study (TIMSS) in 2011 found that just 13% of year 6 pupils in Northern Ireland were taught by teachers who emphasised science investigation in lessons, compared with around 40% in England and the Irish Republic. TIMSS also found that teachers had relatively limited confidence in the delivery of science at primary school. Furthermore, the Committee noted the relatively low level of uptake of science options by primary school student teachers at both university colleges. <BR /> <BR />The Committee raised some of those issues with the Department, and we were subsequently advised that the Education and Training Inspectorate (ETI) would undertake a review of the World Around Us.”
“In primary schools, science teaching at Key Stage 2 is largely based on an element of the curriculum called the World Around Us. That combines science, geography and history and is designed to allow teachers the flexibility to tailor delivery and engender interest in science while also preparing students for more in-depth study later in their school life. Lobby groups such as the Royal Society of Chemistry and the Association for Science Education have expressed concerns about blending other subjects with science. They feel that this has led to a reduction in the science content of teaching at primary schools. They are also worried about a reported lack of inquiry-based learning, which they see as central to a good and rounded education for all children.”
“Today, I anticipate that most of the Committee’s commentary will focus on science, technology and engineering rather than on mathematics, but that is not to undermine the critical importance of the latter.”
“Some of the suggestions, relating to science, for example, are extremely persuasive. They have gained the Committee’s support and, I believe, are worthy of at least some further study by the Department. <BR /> <BR />STEM learning and teaching, both in primary and post-primary schools, is of particular interest to the Committee. The motion indicates that STEM is a key driver of our economy, both current and future, and it is for that reason that the Committee has sought this debate.”
“Members also had the great pleasure of visiting the BT Young Scientist and Technology Exhibition in January and meeting the enthusiastic and extremely knowledgeable pupils from our local schools competing in that very prestigious competition. <BR /> <BR />The Committee noted with great interest a number of recent reports, which are referenced in the motion. You will be glad to hear, Mr Deputy Speaker, that I do not propose to put forward for debate everything that is in all those publications, but I would like to touch on a small number of key points, and I will rely on my Committee colleagues to fill in any salient matters that have been missed. <BR /> <BR />When the Committee is lobbied by educational groups, there is a common theme: they want us to make a part of the revised curriculum compulsory.”
“The skills required for today's job market are very different from those needed when I and, indeed, other Committee members were at school. The world is vastly different, and, thanks to technology, it is a much smaller place. It is paramount that our education system equips all our young people with the skills and knowledge to excel in the modern world. <BR /> <BR />The Education Committee has been lobbied by a number of interested groups in respect of the teaching of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) in schools. The Committee has held information events involving schoolchildren and a wide variety of stakeholder organisations.”
“My supplementary question concerns the reported situation in Portavogie, where the council has accepted a letter of offer from the South-east Area Fisheries Local Action Group (SEA-FLAG) for a 3G pitch after a lengthy and robust six-month process, including obtaining planning permission and a thorough consultation, only to be told that the offer has been withdrawn. Meanwhile, DARD officials have informed the local press that the offer might not be withdrawn but would instead be subject to an economic appraisal. Will the Minister please provide an explanation of why so many conflicting messages are being sent out and assure the people of Portavogie that they will not be short-changed in the distribution of these moneys at the expense of perhaps more politically favourable projects in south Down?”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. In acknowledging the challenges that he has outlined, does the Minister believe that the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) would make health service challenges even more difficult.”
“The Member referred to coding in primary schools. The Minister will be aware of lobbying by the digital industries for the introduction of coding into the curriculum from the age of eight. Is he giving that consideration?”
“The Committee holds the view that if changes are to be transparent and sensible, it is vital that all relevant information is made available to stakeholders, particularly schools, and to the Committee for Education in a manner that allows analysis and time for consideration and amendment, and that has certainly not been the case to date.”
“<BR /> <BR />I hope that the greatly increased funding for the voluntary exit scheme in the public sector, negotiated in the Stormont House Agreement, will allow some breathing space for schools and will result in a period during which principals can plan sensibly and arrange changes in resources and staffing in line with school GCSE and A-level cycles. A key point to consider in all of this is that the financial year does not align with the academic year, causing uncertainty when budgets fluctuate. <BR /> <BR />The 2015-16 budget was always going to be difficult. It is, perhaps, not quite yet the sea change in education in Northern Ireland that was initially proposed. It is clear, however, that in the medium, if not the very short, term hard decisions will be required in education.”
“That brings us to the Vote on Account for the 2015-16 Budget. On behalf of the Committee, I will mention one key issue, the funding for schools. The Committee was pleased to learn that the anticipated reduction in the aggregated schools budget of £78·7 million is to be offset by an increase of £80 million in 2015-16. That news is welcome, and it appears to mean that the projected spending reductions of hundreds of thousands of pounds in some schools seems to have been avoided, if not partially, at least for now. I have written to the Education Minister to urge him to put the record straight in respect of school budgets and to provide clarity for schools as matter of urgency.”
“As Members are also well aware, DE, uniquely, does not participate in the DFP monitoring of savings delivery plans, and I, again, record the Committee's dissatisfaction about that. <BR /> <BR />Turning to the pensions issue, the House is aware that an actuarial revaluation of teachers' pensions liabilities has identified an additional recurrent cost of around £38 million in 2015-16. I understand that that will be met from a central fund in that year but will also have to be met for a further three years, possibly from the Department of Education's budget. Obviously, clarification of that would be welcomed.”
“This is of concern to the Committee and, of course, to school communities anticipating movement on projects. It is incredibly frustrating. Members also noted with concern delays in the Lisanelly project, with spending being somewhat reduced or deferred and a completion date of 2020 now being indicated. <BR /> <BR />On the savings delivery plan, yet again I have to report that the Committee is not able to comment on 2013-14 performance let alone provide any update on 2014-15. In 2012-13, the Education Department's savings achievement was the same as the average for other Departments. I should point out, however, that, unlike most other Departments, the Department of Education also altered its savings delivery plan targets in 2012-13.”
“The Committee has noted increases in end-year capital spending surges in recent years. As with resource, I understand that the Department expects to spend close to its full capital budget in 2014-15. <BR /> <BR />In addition to how much money is being spent, the Committee's concern in respect of capital has also focused on what money is being spent on. During the year, the Committee saw quite significant changes in the capital plan. Although members welcomed increased spending on minor works, the Committee was concerned to note continuing delays with major works; that is, new school builds. The House has greatly welcomed a number of announcements regarding the advancement in planning of new school builds. However, Members would be surprised by how few of these announcements have turned into spades-in-the-ground projects.”
“I suggest that, in future, Estimates and Budget documents should set out staffing levels in all Departments in a consistent way. That would allow the House to compare actual performance with the promises made. The lack of consistency is counterproductive to effective scrutiny. <BR /> <BR />In the present financial year, the Committee has reviewed the monitoring round information and questioned the Department on its spending. On resources, there have been only a small number of changes. I understand that the Department expects to spend close to 100% of its resource allocation by the end of the year, which, on the face of it, is good news. The Department had a large capital budget in 2014-15 of around £182 million, which is about £70 million more than in previous years. There were some limited adjustments in-year owing to asset sales.”
“I will speak on behalf of the Education Committee. The Committee has endeavoured to track the changes in departmental spending that have manifested themselves in the 2014-15 spring Supplementary Estimates. As we are at the end of a Budget cycle, there is now quite a large deviation between the original planned Department of Education spending and the projected final outcome. The deviations, in the case of Education, are largely owing to significant allocations of additional resource, which, of course, is welcome. <BR /> <BR />It is a useful exercise to do an analysis of what Departments have achieved against what was promised. I note that the 2015-16 Budget document set out, in the case of many Departments, how resource reductions will affect core departmental staffing levels. The Department of Education did not include this information.”
“What discussions have been had in respect of decommissioning or scrap-and-build schemes?”
“That cannot truly happen until the sectors are playing by the same rule book.”
“It is a sector that is fighting for pupils and that is in competition with controlled and maintained schools. It now has that foothold, but the statutory advantage is a challenge to a shared education system. There was little incentive to become part of that process while those statutory provisions remain, and that will not be achieved unless we change course. <BR /> <BR />Rather than continuing with two sectors holding an advantage over the rest, we need legislation that sets out how we move towards meaningful sharing across sectors throughout Northern Ireland. With such an imbalance in rights between the sectors, how can we expect the vision of shared education to become established as the means by which our children are educated? <BR /> <BR />The Bain report on area-based planning calls for fairness, equality and cost-effectiveness.”
“If hard decisions have to be made in relation to school transport, it will be the children who attend controlled and maintained schools who will suffer. The new school will now avail itself of that preferential treatment, which will stretch further an already stretched school transport budget. <BR /> <BR />Of course, establishing new Irish-medium schools is not without other problems. Most notably, there is a lack of teachers with the ability to teach through the medium of Irish in STEM and other subjects that will be required in Irish-medium post-primary schools. That has a serious impact on how such schools are able to deliver on the entitlement framework. Is the Minister prepared to turn a blind eye to that? <BR /> <BR />The statutory advantage for integrated education was granted to allow the sector to get a foothold.”
“The judgement in that case created a hierarchy of duties with regard to schools transport. Mr Justice Treacy noted that the Department:”
“Another key role that we supported was the enshrining of the principle of shared education as a key policy of the new authority. As a party, we want the authority to be capable of fulfilling those responsibilities, without one arm being tied behind its back. How will it be able to carry out area-based planning in a full strategic manner if schools can be created or transformed below the sustainable criteria that are being applied to the controlled and maintained sectors? <BR /> <BR />The effect of the duties that are contained in legislation gives rise to a requirement to provide preferential treatment in school transport. Mr Justice Treacy held that the duty in article 89 was more than just an aspiration and was intended to have "practical consequences and legislative significance", and:”
“There is no reason why that type of education could not be expanded in Northern Ireland as well. There is capacity in many schools across Northern Ireland to facilitate and promote Irish-language education as part of an immersion stream. <BR /> <BR />Whatever parents choose, the wrong way, without doubt, is the course that the Minister is plotting, but he is protected by the statutory duty, and that is one reason why that duty must be repealed. It is not in the best interests of children in Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />One of the key roles of the new Education Authority, which this party helped ensure had representatives from the Irish-medium and integrated sectors among other groups, will be area-based planning.”
“In the case of this school, the Minister made his decision contrary, as we have heard, to a wealth of official advice, including that from the Education and Training Inspectorate; the advisory group on strategic development of Irish-medium post-primary education; and his own Department. This decision, taken against all advice and in the promotion of a narrow, ideological view could probably be successfully judicially reviewed were it not for article 89 of the 1998 Order. <BR /> <BR />So, what kind of precedent are we setting in relation to development proposals for future schools? In many countries around the world, immersion programmes are part of existing schools. In Canada, classes that are wholly taught in French take place each and every day alongside classes that are taught in English.”
“In doing so, the Department has a duty to consider other factors:”
“No. I have too much to say. <BR /> <BR />If the Ulster Unionists are not prepared to address the core issue in their motion, then, essentially, what they say is meaningless and toothless. <BR /> <BR />As I have said on previous occasions, when motions are debated in the Chamber, it is not an attack on either the Irish-medium or integrated sectors but a demand for the principles of fairness and equity to be upheld. <BR /> <BR />Under the Department's policy for sustainable schools, it is stated that, because of the statutory protections, it is under:”
“That was given effect by the Education (Northern Ireland) Order 1998. <BR /> <BR />I am happy to support the Ulster Unionists' motion on this as a recognition that, once again, they got it wrong, and I think I am glad to say that they have decided to support our amendment; I am not entirely clear. However, logically speaking, they should support it, since it is the statutory protections afforded to the Irish-medium and integrated sectors that create the irrationality, unaffordability and unsustainability to which they refer.”
“The viability criteria that might apply to the controlled and maintained sectors does not apply to the integrated and Irish-medium schools because of article 64 of the Education Reform (Northern Ireland) Order 1989 and article 89 of the Education (Northern Ireland) Order 1998 respectively. <BR /> <BR />The Minister's decision in respect to development proposal 264 in Dungiven owes much to those statutory protections, which came about as a result of the Belfast Agreement, negotiated and advocated by the Ulster Unionist Party in 1998, which agreed:”
“No, I will not, if you do not mind. I have a lot to say. <BR /> <BR />As Departments across government face austerity cuts, it seems inconceivable that a school of that size can be opened. It is well known that the smaller the school in pupil numbers, the more expensive it is to run. The Bain report identified that costs per pupil begin to rise when the numbers of pupils in primary and post-primary schools dip below roughly 200 and 500 respectively and rise more dramatically the further enrolments drop significantly below those levels. Under that report, it was recommended that the minimum enrolments for new primary schools and years 8 to 12 in new post-primary schools should be 140 pupils for primary schools in urban areas and 105 pupils in rural areas, and 500 pupils in post-primary schools.”
“As the threat of swingeing cuts hung over the aggregated schools budget, it seemed all the more absurd that the Minister would open an Irish-language secondary school for 14 pupils.”
“It is of great concern that someone cannot speak of reform of the statutory protections given to the Irish-medium and integrated sectors without it being labelled as an attack on someone's culture or heritage, or it being described as an abandonment of our policy on shared education. I am afraid that the statutory protections do not extend to a protection from suggesting reform. <BR />Much has been made over the weekend of my party's call for the ending of the statutory advantage for Irish-medium and integrated education. The policy of the DUP has not changed. We believe that shared education is the way to break down the barriers of division. Today's debate comes at an opportune time, when school budgets have come sharply into focus.”
“Just to be clear: the DUP remains committed to ending the benign form of apartheid that exists within our school system. In order to achieve this, it is paramount that the statutory protections afforded to some schools within our education system are removed. That must be done to ensure that there is a level playing field in order that all sectors are fully committed to the principle of shared education for the betterment of our children and society as a whole. <BR /> <BR />I remain fully behind the concept of shared education, as set out in October 2010 by our party leader, the First Minister. It is no surprise, however, that there are those who choose to confuse the desire to educate children together with uncritical support for the integrated sector, as it exists.”
“— the pressures on education? That was only one question.”
“I welcome the Minister's statement, and I am delighted that he has listened to the education sector's concerns. I also seek assurance that the £63 million allocation to the Department of Education will actually go to the aggregated schools budget. Could I also ask the Minister what alternatives those voting against the Budget had to ease —”
“<BR /> <BR />My party wishes to see the freedom of management enjoyed by some schools rolled out to all schools. Most research on education budgets shows that the more that decision-making on funding is placed in the hands of schools, the more effective and efficient the spend. Our goal should be a system whereby local communities, groups and schools are charged with the responsibility of managing the majority of the education budget in the interests of children. Let us acknowledge that we live in challenging financial times, but let us agree to protect our classrooms and use the opportunity of the new authority to shape a service that supports and protects the classroom. Finally, let us empower schools, individually or through sharing, with the responsibility of managing that expenditure in the interests of our children and young people.”
“<BR /> <BR />At present, only 59% of the budget finds its way to schools. In England, it is over 80%, and surely we have an opportunity to seriously review that situation. Principals with whom I have discussed the draft budget wish to have greater delegation to school level of services provided by the boards, and they continually mention to me aspects of the work of the Curriculum Advisory and Support Service and CCEA. The recent report by the Education Committee on the Education and Training Inspectorate and its role in school improvement has received widespread support in the system, yet the Minister and the Department appear unwilling to countenance any meaningful change. The new administrative arrangements provide us with an opportunity to develop a more cost-effective service in the interests of children, and we must grasp it.”
“As Chair, I expect to see the plans to reduce staffing numbers in the Department in the coming months. <BR />There is also an opportunity to streamline support services in the reorganisation of the new authority, and all that will ensure that the classroom can be protected. There is much talk about the new authority needing to appoint lots of staff because of the wind down of the boards over the past number of years. That is not my party's view, and I hope that the assurances that a previous deputy secretary gave to the Education Committee, that the current level of staffing of the five boards would be a ceiling for the new authority and not a baseline, will be honoured and improved upon. We have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to reshape the support structures in favour of schools and pupils, and we must not waste that opportunity.”
“That is why I and my party worked with the Minister to smooth the passage of the new Education Authority through the Assembly. <BR /> <BR />We know that, from 1 April, it will be important to streamline the current administration of education if we are to achieve efficiencies that will help protect the classroom. One body, instead of five, will allocate the vast majority of the education budget resources, and that provides the Minister with a tremendous opportunity to reap efficiencies. Think of the cuts that he can now make in his Department: four fewer bodies for his officials to micromanage; only one letter to send instead of five; and no need to play divide-and-rule games between boards. Think of the reduction in the number of meetings with board officials.”
“<BR /> <BR />Over the last number of years, Sinn Féin Ministers have been guilty of wasting lots of money on ill-thought-out, half-baked schemes such as the Education and Skills Authority (ESA), computer-based assessments, levels of progression, and taking various decisions that could be seen as pet projects across the Department and, of course, the school estate and that have not brought about an efficient use of public funds. However, I do not want to dwell too much on the Minister's past misdemeanours, as they have been well documented. <BR /> <BR />As Chair of the Committee, I have sought to encourage the current Minister onto paths of righteousness to put the service on a more positive and cost-effective footing.”
“Most of the concern being expressed by schools about the current draft budget has been generated by the impact on teaching staff. When you talk to governors and principals — and, as I said, I have already done that over the last few weeks — they can give examples of efficiencies in the current system. There are always ways in which you can drive efficiencies within any bureaucratic system. I know that no one in the Assembly is suggesting otherwise, and that is why we should be cautious about ring-fencing any service in its totality.”
“That should be the Minister's first priority, and it is clearly something that he has failed to do in this draft budget. The basic building block for any school to function is that there are a sufficient number of teachers available to teach our children. If you produce a budget that will result in primary schools whose numbers are static losing five teachers, thereby destroying the ability of the school to function, that is incompetence of the worst kind. It is not the amount of money that is the problem but the manner in which the Budget allocation is being managed. <BR /> <BR />That brings me to the second golden rule and the final part of the motion. A well-planned education budget needs to not only protect the classroom but drive efficiencies in the system.”
“First, it has departed from the basic rule of education budgets of protecting the classroom at all costs. The draft budget proposes to remove £78 million from the aggregated schools budget, which all departmental officials know will create chaos in the system. Furthermore, for the director of finance to come to the Education Committee and talk in a cavalier fashion about 2,500 redundancies — 1,500 non-teaching and 1,000 teaching — thereby ignoring collective agreements, periods of redundancy notices and the reality of the school year, which crosses two financial years, is theatrics of the worst type, and it really was not an Oscar-winning performance. <BR /> <BR />Let us stop this play-acting and agree that, whatever happens, we will protect the classroom as our first priority.”
“It is only the draft budget, and if other Members and Ministers are playing politics with street lighting and other public services, he would perhaps be doing a disservice to his Department if he did not play the game. If that is the case — and I am not saying that it is — it is a damning indictment of our departmental system that, in a time of austerity, we are playing on the vulnerabilities and fears of the population to score points against one another. Perhaps that is just politics, but surely there is a better way to manage difficult financial settlements than by playing on people's fears. <BR /> <BR />My major problem with the current draft budget and its proposals is that it has broken two golden rules that have always governed the budgetary process in education.”