Paul Givan
Lagan Valley · Democratic Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“The EA's enhanced support model has been out for consultation. The Member's party is the largest political grouping on the Education Authority, so his party supported the model's being consulted on.”
“Protections around strike action and action short of strike are firmly established in statute for all workers, including teachers. If the Member is referring to the Education Inspections Bill, let me be clear: nothing in that legislation removes or undermines that right.”
“The issue was covered at length at the Education Committee. The position is still not where it ought to be. When I came into office, the position that I inherited was much worse than it is today.”
“It is an area that I have had to navigate, as have many previous Education Ministers. Industrial relations is an area that needs ongoing work. I have outlined how we can address it, but I come back to saying that, when workload was undefined, trade unions struggled to specify the challenge.”
“That is not a fair characterisation. In fact, I was with Justin McCamphill, the leader of NASUWT, at the launch of the curriculum reform, at which he commended me for it and said that he thought that it was good. I have sat in many a meeting with trade union representatives during which they have said, "This is a good initiative.”
“That is exactly why there is a 16-week consultation period, rather than the normal 12 weeks or the minimum eight weeks; to allow the public and teaching profession to very much engage in that curriculum, which I commend to all Members.”
The complete record
Every one of 6,258 lines we hold for Paul Givan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 10 of 126.
“My view, which I have set out previously in correspondence — Mr Sheehan referenced that — is that legislation is not necessary and may, in fact, constrain our ability to respond flexibly to changing circumstances. A statutory requirement to publish a workforce plan within 12 months, followed by fixed five-year cycles, does not reflect the dynamic nature of the sector. Growth patterns vary, recruitment pipelines shift and needs evolve in ways that may require more responsive action than a fixed review period would allow. Furthermore, the Bill creates a planning framework that would require funding for the potential measures that a workforce plan might identify. As the Bill's explanatory and financial memorandum acknowledges, additional resources would be required to deliver the administrative duties that would be created by the Bill.”
“The Education Authority is progressing innovative work on the use of artificial intelligence to reduce teacher workload in Irish-medium education settings and plans to appoint accredited AI leads in every Irish-medium school. The Department of Education continues to work with partners to explore additional pathways for fluent Irish speakers to enter the profession, including for entrants from other jurisdictions and alternative training routes. All of that demonstrates that the issues that are highlighted by the Bill are already being not just actively considered but addressed. <BR /> <BR />The question for the Assembly today is not whether workforce challenges exist — they clearly do, and I agree — but whether legislation is the most appropriate mechanism to address them.”
“<BR /> <BR />Through TransformED, a new teacher training bursary scheme is being introduced, with Irish-medium education highlighted as one of the priority areas that is experiencing the most acute shortage. I say to the Sinn Féin Members that that shows that TransformED is delivering for the Irish-medium sector.”
“Members have referenced equality. Whenever reductions took place, preferential treatment — inequality, if one could describe it as that — was afforded to the Irish-medium sector. People will say that that was the right thing to do. When reductions were applied to every other sector, that did not apply. There was not equality of cuts to the Irish-medium sector, which was given preferential treatment. People can justify that as being the right thing to do. It is not the case that the Bill addresses inequality or the Irish-medium sector being treated as inferior to other sectors. Members have highlighted that there is already a statutory duty and an enhancement of protection that is not afforded to other sectors. The Bill adds further rights on top of existing rights that do not extend to other sectors.”
“The Department has established an Irish-medium strategy steering group and a working group that involves CnaG, the EA, CCEA, CCMS, CSSC, Altram and representatives from Irish-medium schools. Those groups are already in the process of developing the Department's first dedicated Irish-medium education strategy, which will set out actions to address teacher supply, leadership development, SEN provision, early years capacity and the availability of immersion-appropriate resources. That work reflects extensive consultation with the same stakeholders that have been identified in the Bill. It ensures that all voices are heard without introducing statutory rigidity. <BR /> <BR />Initial teacher education intake numbers for Irish-medium education have been protected, even at times when reductions were required elsewhere.”
“Those are real challenges across the whole education system, some of which are felt most keenly in Irish-medium education and other sectors. They can affect not only staff but the quality of provision for children and the ability of schools to plan for growth. <BR /> <BR />Some Sinn Féin Members are keen to attack TransformED, but I think that they understand it, and, in understanding it, they will know that TransformED has recognised the importance of the workforce in the delivery of quality education and for Irish-medium education and our system as a whole. While I recognise the intention behind the Bill, I believe that it is important to note that a substantial programme of work is already in place.”
“Irish-medium education has experienced sustained growth in recent years, and that brings with it new demands on staffing, training, leadership, resources and support services. Consultation responses on this private Member's Bill, as well as research from Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta, Stranmillis University College, Queen's University Belfast and others, highlights shortages of teachers, classroom assistants and SEN professionals with the requisite level of Irish. Teachers also report considerable additional workload from preparing appropriate resources, translating materials and supporting pupils with differing levels of language exposure. Additionally, school leaders highlight issues with buildings, classroom space and access to specialist support.”
“<BR /> <BR />At its core, the Bill seeks to place a statutory duty on the Department to prepare and publish a workforce plan for Irish-medium education and progress reviews against it. It proposes that the first plan be published within one year of the Act's coming into operation and that updated plans be published at intervals of no more than five years. It also places duties on the Minister to consult widely with schools, teachers, parents, — let me try — Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta, more commonly known as CnaG, and others across the sector. It requires measurable targets and a report to the Assembly on the implementation of each plan within 18 months. <BR /> <BR />My Department understands that the sector faces a number of well-recognised and long-standing pressures.”
“Thank you, Mr McNulty. Forgive me for not noting that you were at that meeting and made the case for the organisation as well. <BR /> <BR />Today's debate gives us an opportunity to consider the strengths and the pressures in Irish-medium education and to reflect on how the Executive and the Department can best support that important and growing sector. Before I turn to the detail of the Bill, let me signpost briefly what I intend to cover. I will speak first about the aims of the Bill. I will then address the current workforce challenges in Irish-medium education. After that, I will outline the work that the Department is already taking forward, including the development of a dedicated Irish-medium education strategy. Finally, I will set out my initial view on the legislative proposals that are before the Assembly today.”
“Mr McNulty talked about unionism collectively and broadly having nothing to fear. This unionist Minister has absolutely nothing to fear, nor have I shown any concerns in that respect. Indeed, Cara Hunter rightly said that, when she and her colleague Patsy McGlone came to me about a particular project — Scoil Spreagtha — that had experienced funding cuts, asking me to engage in finding a solution in order for that organisation to continue to provide a taster of Irish for pupils in English-speaking schools, I proactively engaged and found a solution and provided funding of some £100,000 to that organisation. Therefore, I am content that I have a track record that demonstrates my bona fides as a Minister for all when it comes to Irish-medium education. <BR /> <BR />I will give way to Mr McNulty.”
“At times, I have listened to political comments made by some commentators and some in the House, and I have said to myself, "That must not be relevant to the Department of Education", because I do not think that Members will find any evidence of any form of inequality of treatment of the Irish-medium sector by me as Minister of Education.”
“I have sought to address concerns that have been brought to me by the Irish-medium sector when it comes to education and the sector's needs, as you would expect any Education Minister to do for any sector. Those needs vary, and I will outline a range of issues on which the Irish-medium sector has concerns, as well as how we seek to support it. <BR /> <BR />As a Minister, I have been actively involved in taking decisions to provide development proposals for nursery provision. I have also actively taken decisions to move forward new builds for the Irish-medium sector. I know that the narrative of having a DUP Education Minister who is proactively engaged with and is encouraging towards Irish-medium education does not always suit some Members in the House.”
“Thank you, Deputy Speaker. <BR /> <BR />I acknowledge the intent behind the private Member's Bill, and I recognise the many teachers, school leaders, classroom assistants, other support staff, parents, pupils and representatives of sectoral bodies who have contributed to discussions about the future workforce needs of Irish-medium education. Their commitment to ensuring high-quality education through the medium of Irish is clear, and I record my appreciation of their ongoing work and dedication. <BR /> <BR />I have visited many Irish-medium schools. Colleagues in the Assembly invited me to do so, and I thoroughly enjoyed those experiences. I was made very welcome, and I admired the education that was being provided to those young people.”
“For the curriculum under TransformED, there is a distinct strand to improve the curriculum for Irish-medium education, because Irish-medium schools are being failed by the current curriculum. A whole series of evidence can therefore be produced to show how we are implementing the statutory duty, and Mr Sheehan has not reflected that yet. I cannot get involved in the decision that the Speaker would have made and whether the Speaker considered my correspondence with the Member. I do not even know whether it is appropriate for MLAs to discuss openly what are ultimately the Speaker's decisions, but that is something for the Speaker to decide on.”
“I will talk about this further later. Part of the issue is that Members get to speak, and then a Minister provides a lot of information that Members have not had the chance to hear. That may be a procedural issue for the Assembly to consider. <BR /> <BR />The inference that Mr Sheehan has drawn is that the fact that a strategy is expected some time in 2027 suggests that nothing has been happening. When I intervened on the Chairman of the Committee, I outlined how we are discharging the statutory duty. When other sectors' numbers were being reduced, that did not apply to the Irish-medium sector. We have had positive approval of development proposals in the Irish-medium sector. We have had new builds in the Irish-medium sector. Under TransformED, we have a bursary for the Irish-medium sector.”
“<BR /> <BR />There is clear evidence that, because of the Department of Education during my time as Minister approving nurseries that became statutory, new school builds and bursaries, the Irish-medium sector has been able to expand, and I have happily been supporting its development. The question for Members, which I will pose it again later, is this: given the work that we are already doing and the existing statutory duty, why would we place a specific statutory duty for one sector that will not apply to any other sector when it comes to workforce issues, when those challenges are being felt in every sector and are not unique to one?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I will, obviously, make my remarks later in the debate when it is my turn to respond. I appreciate that the Member rightly recognises that the Department has made progress in this area, not least as part of TransformED and through the bursary schemes. When we identified shortages in some subject-specific areas, Irish-medium education was one of those, and I approved the provision of a bursary scheme in order to create more opportunities to attract people into the workforce. In line with the statutory duty on the Department of Education, however, which the Member has referenced, when there were previous reductions in the number of students coming into teaching, they never fell on the Irish-medium sector. It was protected by the statutory duty while there were reductions in other sectors.”
“<BR /> <BR />We owe it to families in food poverty to get this right, and we owe it to children to protect the education system that they depend on. The Bill does not meet that test. Therefore, Members, I am unable to support it and will vote against it. However, I know that it will go to the Committee for Education, whose members will be able to interrogate it further. I trust that they, in carrying out the scrutiny role that we, as legislators, have to do, will come to the same conclusion as I came to on the Bill. In no way is that to detract from the Bill sponsor's genuine motivation in bringing it forward. I commend him for that work. It is an honourable thing that he seeks to do, but, on this occasion, I do not believe that it is the most effective way to do it.”
“However, Members, this is not the best way to do that, and we should be careful about proceeding down this route. As legislators, we have a duty to ensure that legislation is well conceived, technically sound, appropriately funded and directed at the correct public bodies. In my view, the Bill fails on all of those counts. It tackles the symptoms but not the causes, and it ignores more than it addresses. It is currently unworkable in practice, and it distorts the primary purpose of the Department of Education. Crucially, it risks making an already massively underfunded education system even less able to deliver for our children. It robs from the education of Peter to fund the holiday meal payments of Paul. That does not make good law, nor would it deliver the outcomes that are genuinely needed for families who are in food poverty.”
“More than 90% of MLAs are in parties that are in that Government, but that proposal was not included. However, just because it has not been brought forward and Members are frustrated, that does not justify coming forward with a private Member's Bill and wanting the Assembly to vote for that in order to somehow send the message, "If somebody else had done that, I would not have had to bring it forward". <BR /> <BR />Were this effective legislation that would address the core challenges of food poverty in our society, I would vote for it. It would create a financial problem for the Executive, but, if I felt that it would fundamentally change food poverty in Northern Ireland for families who need that help, I would say that it was a priority.”
“It would be an unfunded statutory duty that we do not have the budget to deliver without damaging the educational services that those same families' children depend on. <BR /> <BR />I have outlined clear reasons why the Bill should be opposed, the most important being that it would cause great harm by diverting funding from the Education budget to deliver the payments. I understand the aim of the Bill and the need for a solution to be found for families in food poverty. However, this is a blunt instrument that is being applied to a complex and wide-ranging problem that goes far beyond school-age children and school holiday periods. There may be merit in Members saying, "If only the Executive were bringing forward this legislation". I have outlined why that has not happened: it was not in the Programme for Government.”
“It is an approach that delivers a whole-family, year-round, Executive-wide and properly funded solution to food poverty that treats it as a consequence of households having insufficient income. That means more holistic actions to support all members of households in food poverty, not just focusing on a small cohort of school-age children on weekdays during school holidays. It means Executive-wide commitment and funding so that the cost is not borne by our schools and our children's education. The Department of Education will play its full part in any properly structured Executive-wide response. What is unreasonable and reckless, however, is to expect that my Department should carry the cost of the Bill alone.”
“Everyone here can agree with the sentiment that has been expressed. We can all emotionally subscribe to wanting to address holiday hunger, but we have to ask whether the Bill will do that and do it effectively. That requires us to be dispassionate and not emotionally attached and to critically analyse whether we will achieve the objective. I believe that, when Members do that, they will say that there is a better way for it to be addressed. <BR /> <BR />I am not here simply to oppose the Bill. I want to be clear about what, I believe, the right response looks like. Northern Ireland needs a comprehensive approach to tackling food poverty for everyone.”
“It is not simply that a future, potentially more effective policy to support families in food poverty would have to work around the statutory duty; it is that the existence of the duty could make a future, potentially more effective policy less likely to be implemented. Any Executive considering their response to household food poverty would look at the cost of that response on top of the £21 million-plus required through the Bill. That makes the financial case for a more ambitious response harder to make, not easier. I have no doubt that all Members genuinely want to see food poverty addressed comprehensively, but they should understand that passing the Bill may entrench an inadequate response rather than help to deliver a better one. <BR /> <BR />It is not just about doing things right; it is about doing the right things.”
“My Department and the EA will be ready to work with all other Departments to support any properly funded Executive-wide actions to tackle food poverty, but it would be much better if they help to tackle the root causes rather than the symptoms. <BR /> <BR />Another area of concern that I have with the Bill is that it would remove future flexibility. The Executive currently retain full flexibility to introduce measures that tackle food poverty. That flexibility matters because, as circumstances evolve, our response to food poverty needs to be able to evolve. That point has a consequence that has not yet been sufficiently acknowledged in the debate.”
“The causes are multiple, and the solutions that are needed to address it are multiple. <BR /> <BR />The Bill does nothing to make it less likely that the same families will need support with food poverty next year or the year after or, indeed, even in a decade's time. It introduces a statutory duty in response to a symptom, while leaving the causes entirely untouched. That is not a sustainable approach to a serious social challenge. Food poverty is rooted fundamentally in the issue of inadequate household income and wider social disadvantage. That requires a social welfare solution that is led collectively by the Executive.”
“It is also about being honest around the limited financial resources that we have to make sure that those resources are spent in the most effective way. I am not disputing the premise on which the Member made his intervention — I agree with it — but it is about how effectively we address it. <BR /> <BR />We could pass the legislation and address a small part of the wider problem for a small part of the affected population for a small part of the year, but I believe that legislating in that way would create more problems than it would solve. I also believe that it is important to recognise that the Bill tackles the symptoms of food poverty not the causes. Food poverty affects families in different ways and for different reasons. Some experience it for long periods, others periodically.”
“I agree, and I made the point at the start of my contribution that it is a noble, worthy cause, and all of us should want to ensure that no child is hungry. It is a wider societal problem, and, in many homes, there are multiple reasons why there is food poverty and poverty. There are many causation factors that result in that. No parent or family ever wants to find themselves in poverty, so there can be no scapegoating and trying to blame parents for somehow getting themselves into that situation; no thinking that we, as a society, should somehow preside over and judge them and dismiss them, saying that it is their fault and that we should not support them. That is an appalling attitude for anybody to take, and it is one that I would never subscribe to. It is about finding the most effective way to address the issues.”
“The rest of their family also experiences it, and some parents may be quietly skipping meals so that their children can eat. Food poverty is a household problem that belongs to the whole family, and the Bill does not address that. <BR /> <BR />I also ask Members to consider what the Bill leaves out: the children who are below school age; the parents who manage the household budget and sometimes go without; the food poverty that exists every evening and weekend; and the many families who are just above the eligibility threshold for free school meals but are nonetheless struggling.”
“Members are therefore being asked to vote for a Bill that imposes a permanent duty at a substantial cost without any certainty as to how it will be paid for at a time when the Education budget is already under unprecedented strain. <BR /> <BR />I believe that the Bill also misdiagnoses the problem that it seeks to solve. If a child is hungry, it is not because schools are closed during holiday periods. The cause is that the child's family does not have sufficient income to meet their basic food needs. That poverty did not begin when the school term ended or end when it resumed. It also exists on weekends, in the evenings and throughout the whole year. A child who experiences food poverty is not experiencing it alone.”
“Using more realistic projections and the 7·2% level of inflation, my officials estimate that the figure of £20·8 million in this financial year would rise to £31·5 million by 2033-34. That cost for 2033-34 is over a third higher than what is estimated by the Bill sponsor, but I have no doubt that the Committee will want to explore that area to make sure that there is accuracy around the figure. I am happy for my officials to engage in that process. <BR /> <BR />Not only is the Bill unaffordable based upon the financial context that faces the Department that I outlined, it is even more unaffordable than the explanatory and financial memorandum estimates.”
“As was explained in my Department's draft five-year financial strategy, the EA will need to implement a planned multi-year programme of price increases to narrow the gap between its prices and its cost of producing the meals. That is essential to ensure the long-term sustainability of the EA school meals service. Under the Bill as drafted, such rises will result in higher holiday meal payments, increasing the overall funding that is required to implement it year after year. That will go well beyond the 3·5% annual increase that is referenced in the explanatory and financial memorandum. <BR /> <BR />That memorandum also underestimates the likely number of pupils who will be entitled to free school meals in the coming years and the number of eligible days per year when the payments would be required.”
“No, your explanatory and financial memorandum says that. I am highlighting what you have introduced. It says that it is £20·6 million in the current financial year, and then your Bill says that it is going to be £23·2 million by 2033-34. That is based on an inflationary increase of 3·5%. That figure is not my figure; it is the Bill sponsor's figure. <BR /> <BR />I am saying that the more accurate figure — I am now going to give you the details as to what it is and the basis on which I provided it — is that it will rise to £31·5 million by 2033. From 2016-17, the cost to the Education Authority of producing a meal has risen each year on average by 7·2%. That is more than double the rate that is being used by the Bill sponsor in his cost estimates.”
“Members, that is based on a 3·5% level of inflation. The reality for the Education Authority is that, since 2016-17, its cost of producing a meal has risen each year on average by 7·2%.”
“That wording creates a direct mismatch with existing free school meals provision, with no rationale for that discrepancy. Those are fundamental flaws that go to the heart of whether the Bill can be consistently and fairly implemented in practice. As legislators, we have a duty to ensure that legislation is technically sound and workable. The Bill as drafted is neither. <BR /> <BR />The Bill also significantly underestimates the likely cost of payments in the years ahead, which compounds the affordability problem that I have already set out. The explanatory and financial memorandum states that the costs will rise:”
“However, at Second Stage, I will outline where I believe that the Bill, as drafted, is unworkable when it comes to the amount of payment that would be calculated. <BR /> <BR />The value of the payment would be based on what a parent would pay for a meal if their child was not entitled to free school meals. In post-primary schools, there is no single value for that, as pupils select the individual items that they wish to buy and pay the corresponding amount at the till. It is therefore not possible, in the Bill as drafted, to identify a single amount for the EA to pay to those families. The Bill also refers to the cost of "milk, meals or other refreshment". A free school meal does not include a drink, as fresh drinking water is available for free.”
“It is clear that, even in times of a global pandemic, the Executive recognised that those payments were direct financial support to low-income families to cover food costs when children were not in school. That is income support, not education. The Executive acted at that time to protect education. The Bill does not. <BR /> <BR />Not for the first time with a Member's Bill, I also have real concerns that it has significant technical and legislative shortcomings and that it would require significant amendment to become workable, particularly for the most problematic issues in the basis and design of the core provisions. I have no doubt that the Committee could look at that and that my Department could assist the Bill sponsor with its drafting and the need to address its flaws.”
“It was not because food poverty outside term time was primarily an Education matter, nor was it because the Executive had made a considered, long-term, strategic decision that DE was the correct home for that policy. My Department — before I was there — led on that scheme on behalf of the Executive simply because the EA could do it at speed, and speed was required in response to a global pandemic. I do not believe that what was effectively an emergency response should then set future precedent, which the Bill would introduce. The Department of Education's leading on the delivery of that scheme was based on additional ring-fenced funding that was provided to my Department so that the funding did not have to be diverted from educational priorities.”
“<BR /> <BR />The history of the previous school holiday food hunger grant scheme matters, as it exposes a fundamental misunderstanding at the heart of the Bill. Between 2020 and 2023, the previous Executive agreed to deliver that scheme, and it was established at pace in unique circumstances at the outset of the global pandemic. The Executive wanted a scheme introduced to ensure that children from low-income families had access to food during their school holidays. As the Education Authority had the data and payment infrastructure to get money to families quickly, Education was given the operational role of delivering the scheme on behalf of the Executive.”
“By no means am I trying to absolve myself of any responsibility or trying not to provide answers to this. I have, and I have fed them in officially from my Department to the Department for Communities and provided suggestions on how we can assist in tackling those issues. There are ways in which we are seeking to address the issue across the Departments. <BR /> <BR />Education can, and does, play a vital role in supporting disadvantaged pupils during the school day. However, as I have said before, the Education budget is not a welfare fund. The fact that the Education system holds the data on free school meals entitlement does not make my Department the right one to provide what is effectively a form of welfare support to those families.”
“Is there a way for other community organisations to assist? We can fund those community organisations to ensure that any investment —". The question was posed by the Member from my party Mr Martin: if we had £20 million and wanted to make it effective for dealing with hunger, is this the way that we would do it? I would say that it is not, but could you use £20 million a year, if you had it, to open up schools and have canteens available for children to come in and make sure that it is being used for the purposes of feeding them? Could you fund community organisations and council facilities outside term time to make sure that that funding actually fulfils the purpose for which it is intended? I fed in all of that, as Minister, to say that Education is part of the solution.”
“I say to the Member and to other Members that we have an anti-poverty strategy. Where is the funding for that strategy? Why is there not an amendment or legislation to say, "Fund the anti-poverty strategy"? It has not been given the resources by the Executive. I am part of the Executive, and so are other Members in the Assembly. I know that the Member is not part of the Executive, but there is an anti-poverty strategy. I engaged with the Minister for Communities, and, as part of that engagement, I said to the Minister, "Education has a role in tackling hunger. Is there a way that we could open up schools and canteens outside school term time? Could we utilise our school estate to make sure that we are part of the solution and that we can provide access to those facilities outside school term time?”
“I absolutely have a role in addressing these issues, but to vote in favour of the Bill because there is a connection and say that that means that the responsibility for dealing with it and resourcing it would come out of only the Department of Education's resources is not credible. <BR /> <BR />I will give way to the Member.”
“Should we emasculate and bring them all into the Department of Education?”
“The issues experienced by some low-income families during school holidays are essentially the same issues that they face at any other time: they have insufficient income to meet their needs. That is not a problem that the education system is designed or resourced to address. Education can and does play a vital role in supporting disadvantaged pupils during the school day, but the Education budget is not a welfare fund. The Member for East Londonderry, who spoke just before me, made the connection about how this can be an education issue. The basis upon which she makes that argument is not beyond credibility, but education also has a role in reducing offending in the criminal justice system, so should I take over the Department of Justice? Education has responsibilities that go into so many other departmental areas.”
“Therefore, we need to be clear that this will not inevitably deal with holiday hunger and food provision, because there is no mechanism to ensure that that is how the payment will be utilised. We can hope that it will be utilised for that purpose, but we cannot guarantee it. Therefore, I believe that, de facto, this is a social welfare intervention. We can debate the rights or wrongs associated with that, and many would want to introduce that. <BR /> <BR />I accept that children being adequately fed during the school holidays will help them when they return to school, but that does not make the payment itself an educational intervention any more than a housing benefit becomes an educational intervention because children learn better when they have a stable and good home.”
“At the risk of pointing out the obvious, the Bill does not inevitably alleviate food poverty any more than it alleviates fuel poverty. It provides a cash payment to parents, not food for children. Parents will, understandably, spend the money on whatever is the greatest priority in the family budget at any given time. I think that it was the Alliance Member for Lagan Valley who indicated that it would potentially help ease the financial burden around childcare costs, heating costs and essentials. The Member is right; I am not disagreeing with the Member. Of course any funding that is provided will be able to offset costs associated with other financial burdens that families are dealing with.”
“Members are not saying that, however. I am not saying that we should put up our rates. In fact, we are sending letters to the Treasury and the Prime Minister demanding cuts in order to allow us to address the cost-of-living crisis with which we are dealing. We also want to see more spent on public services. When making propositions, we therefore need to be honest with the public about their implications. <BR /> <BR />The Bill's explanatory and financial memorandum states that the purpose of the scheme is to "alleviate food poverty". I have said that that is noble, and it is something that we should all support and want to see addressed, as it is a direct financial payment to low-income families to cover food costs when children are on school holidays.”
“<BR /> <BR />When it comes to funding this Bill, there are real implications for the Department of Education. Members therefore cannot have it both ways. They cannot vote for the Bill and then express any surprise about the resulting cuts to education provision. Alternatively, if we were to maintain the present level of spending on free school meals, we would have to reduce the number of children who would be entitled to benefit from that scheme. If the Bill were to be funded from the centre, Members should be honest enough to identify where cuts would then be made. If they believe that funding the Bill is justified, they should perhaps propose an increase in the regional rate in order to fund it. They should say to the public, "It's the right thing to do, so we're going to put up your rates to pay for it".”
“I can address the point about making sure that funding for any scheme to tackle poverty goes towards food, but we are discussing the principle. We are talking about passing a private Member's Bill that has financial implications. It is not legislation that is free from financial resources needing to be allocated to it. In the same way, the private Member's Bill that we passed in the final months of the previous mandate has not been commenced because of the costs associated with it. In my view, private Members' Bills are not best placed to deal with tens of millions of pounds of public funding. They are not best placed to ensure that funding is discharged in the most effective way. As I said, we have not been able to commence another private Member's Bill that the Assembly passed.”