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 20 of 126.
“They now have to consult and engage with their pupils. Pupils, as well as parents, can raise their voice, and I very much encourage girls to do that. They should make their case. Again, we struck a balance that meant that schools were to make those decisions on their uniform. While some schools have already taken a decision, meaning that there is now a choice to wear a skirt or trousers, others have not taken that position to date. The legislation and the guidelines enhance the opportunity for that change to take place. Schools can make such changes, and I encourage people, particularly pupils, to engage in the policy consultation process in order to devise the most appropriate school uniform policy for them.”
“I thank Mr Burrows for his supplementary question and wish him well in the weeks ahead. I made a comment earlier about Mr Butler being number one today, and Mr Burrows is now number two. We wait to see whether Mr Butler will hand in his wings and give the Member his dream shot at being the leader of the Ulster Unionist Party. If he does, I wish him well in his endeavours. <BR /> <BR />The Member asked a question about the guidelines, and it is one that we have referred to on a number of occasions. The guidance now empowers pupils, particularly young ones, to make the case for changes. In no way does it prohibit schools from putting in place provision for girls to wear trousers. I was always clear that there was a balance to be struck in respecting the autonomy of individual schools to devise their school uniform policy.”
“Should schools not do so or should they seek to penalise a pupil for not following the school uniform policy because of affordability, my Department can and will issue a legal direction to ensure full compliance. <BR /> <BR />The day after the Bill receives Royal Assent, it will come into operation, and the updated guidelines will formally issue to schools. Schools have already had sight of the guidelines and are aware that their uniform policies for the 2026-27 school year must comply with them.”
“I can confirm that, as previously advised, the school uniform guidelines have been updated to clarify that all pupils are to be permitted to wear a non-branded coat. That has always been the intention. Schools can require a range of colours but not a branded coat, and they cannot require a coat with school-specific branding. The legal rights are achieved through a combination of the School Uniforms (Guidelines and Allowances) Bill and the guidelines. The Bill places a legal duty on schools to adhere to the guidelines when devising, reviewing, implementing and enforcing their uniform policy. That means that schools must adhere to the requirements in the guidelines, which include permitting non-branded coats for all pupils.”
“When it comes to choosing a school, whether controlled, Catholic maintained, integrated or Irish-medium, the transportation policy incentivises parental choice, as opposed to saying, "If you do not go to your nearest school, irrespective of the sector, you will not be funded". <BR /> <BR />All of that is underpinned by legislation, so making changes would require that debate and discussion. Given the financial pressures that are crystallising not just in my Department but across the Executive, we need to have those debates, but we recognise that it would take time to make those changes and for them to have an impact.”
“The broader question that the Member raises is an important one. Almost 95,000 pupils in Northern Ireland receive some transport assistance. That is the most generous provision of anywhere in the United Kingdom. It accounts for £140 million in the 2024-25 financial year. That is significant expenditure. When Members ask me to review that, it is often with a view to increasing rather than reducing the accessibility of transportation. One of the biggest increases in expenditure has been in special educational needs provision; that has led to exponential growth. <BR /> <BR />Transport assistance is also used to underpin parental choice.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is an important issue. The EA is carrying out an exercise to ensure that there is effective use of public resources when it comes to that funding, but I recognise that some circumstances are unique to provision for children with special educational needs. My main concern is to make sure that children get to school, but, where we can make that more efficient and effective for the taxpayer, we should do so.”
“The benchmark used by the EA is the Department for Infrastructure rate for metered journeys of £1·86 to £2·03 per mile. Those figures are set out in legislation — they were revised in December 2023 to take account of rising fuel costs and other taxi industry pressures — but there are contracts in place under which the rate is significantly higher. When I look at the rationale for that, however, I see that, in determining a fare for a school run, taxi operators need to take account of multiple stops, non-continuous runs and significant repositioning of what are called "dead miles", when there are no passengers. There is no straight, like-for-like comparison between the transportation of children, especially those with special needs, and a normal taxi fare, such as when you call up a taxi to get from A to B.”
“The process to date has not led to any contract being returned by a provider. The EA engaged with operators and some of the other organisations. A number of them came forward to engage on their contracts. There is ongoing engagement, but, to date, no contract has been returned. There needs to be provision for transport, so, were a contract to be returned, it would need to be tendered, and there would be an opportunity for it to be replaced. I certainly would not want there to be a gap in provision if such circumstances materialised, but, to date, no contract has been returned.”
“Specialist provisions increasingly being located outside local communities creates further pressure on transportation costs. If the options for a child are to travel a considerable distance or not to travel at all because of the cost, we will have to meet the cost. Some children who need a placement do not have provision in their local community, which leads to increased transport costs. However, it is vital that that delivers value for money. That is why the EA has carried out a review of its contracts and engaged with organisations in the taxi industry on those contracts. We must ensure, where possible, the efficient and effective use of taxpayers' money.”
“I thank Mr Butler for the question. I see that he is number one and Mr Burrows is number two on the list for questions today. Maybe that is a harbinger of things to come: time will tell. Maybe this is the closest that we will get to a hustings debate: I do not know. We will have to wait and see. <BR /> <BR />The Member raises important questions and highlights the impressive work that Lagan Valley Rural Transport carries out in our constituency. That is certainly an area in which there can be engagement between the EA and community transport groups. If provision can be harnessed through that process, I would certainly encourage that. <BR /> <BR />The Member is right: it is critical that we provide children with access to education.”
“If additional transport needs are identified during a child's assessment, transport assistance must be arranged through the most suitable means available, ensuring that that provision is compatible with the efficient use of resources. However, it can be challenging to meet each child's needs whilst managing costs responsibly.”
“The Education Authority (EA) is reviewing its school transport provision to identify any options to reduce costs. My officials are actively supporting that work. As part of the process, equality issues are being carefully considered to understand the potential impact of any proposals. Further consultation may be needed before options are finalised. <BR /> <BR />I fully recognise that some children have significant needs. I do not underestimate how challenging it is to meet those needs whilst ensuring that costs remain reasonable and sustainable. Every child with a statement of SEN has their needs identified in the EA statutory assessment and review process.”
“He ought to know that we operate on consensus, and nationalists, along with Alliance, need to realise that cross-community consensus is the way forward, which will not be to the exclusion of unionists in the House.”
“Obviously, I am not intervening as Education Minister, hence my sitting on these Benches for the debate. He makes a valid point and asks a valid question about the SDLP motion that was tabled around six months ago. For the record, the DUP does not have within its gift the ability to secure a petition of concern. I welcome those in the Ulster Unionist Party and the TUV who joined the DUP in securing the petition of concern. <BR /> <BR />The Member has talked a lot about majoritarianism.”
“Would it be the same if a person from a different political party had been appointed? I suggest that it would not. Therefore, it is unfair to characterise that appointment in the way in which it has been characterised. The chief executive of the Education Authority was appointed by the head of the Civil Service. A permanent secretary was identified and brought forward. The appointment was ratified by the Education Authority board. The inferences that are being drawn about that process are unfair to the individual who is chief executive of the Education Authority. I appeal to Members to desist. I wanted to address that point without labouring it. <BR /> <BR />Members have contributed to the debate on a Bill that will give teachers the professional body that they deserve. I commend the General Teaching Council Bill to the House.”
“I will not labour this point, as it has been raised before, but it would be remiss of me not to correct some of Mr O'Toole's points about appointments. People have raised issues about the public appointments process for six of the 12 registered teachers. I appoint hundreds of boards of governors. I am the appointing authority for a considerable number of boards of governors. No one has ever challenged my appointment of those governors when I have approved them. <BR /> <BR />I have appointed other people to senior positions through a public appointments process. The appointment of the EA chairman was carried out in line with all of the processes. It came through a process, and I then had to select the individual. It appears to me that some are contending that I should discriminate on the basis of someone's political opinion or identity.”
“That is to its credit, and it will be important in refining the legislation. I am not saying that the Bill, as presented at Second Stage, will not be subject to refinement or, indeed, improvement. I am happy to engage with the Committee. However, it is important that we retain the integrity of the Bill's fundamental principles and the reasons that we got to where we did throughout the various processes and in Members' consideration of amendments that may be proposed.”
“Again, that needs to be conducted in a timely fashion. That will be helpful insight as the Committee deliberates on those issues. I agree with the sentiment that has been expressed. <BR /> <BR />There is no doubt that the Committee will ask a number of questions. People have raised things at Second Stage. Having had experience of the Committee, I know that it will leave no stone unturned when it comes to delving into all those matters.”
“I have not spoken about it in this Second Stage debate, but it will be important that, when it deals with conduct issues, the body, in its reformed capacity, does so in the manner that Mr Burrows has articulated. We do not want spurious claims to be brought forward and for those to take considerable time to be investigated, to the individual's detriment. If someone can be dismissed, they should be dismissed rapidly. We live in a world where, at times, people, for whatever different reasons, will make spurious claims. For the individual concerned, it is unsatisfactory that there would be a protracted period of jeopardy when they have done nothing wrong. It is important that those issues can be expedited and filtered, and that, quite rightly, when people bring forward serious claims, there is appropriate investigation and support.”
“I will take that request away. Ultimately, when officials come before the Committee, in the advice that they give in responding to members' questions, they will not try to withhold information from the Committee about all the submissions processes that were followed. I do not think that it would be the norm to provide ministerial submissions to a Committee. However, I am quite happy for my officials, in engaging with the Committee, to provide information in response to any requests that it has in that respect. <BR /> <BR />I will deal with a number of the questions that I picked up on. Given his experience with the police, Mr Burrows's input to the Committee will be very insightful.”
“<BR /> <BR />"What do I get for my fee?" will always remain a valid question. However, it is one that can be answered only in terms of the collective benefits that the new GTCNI will deliver for our teachers. Going forward, the new board will be responsible for fees and will wish to be transparent about how that money is being spent and the value for money that it delivers.”
“<BR /> <BR />As I said in my opening remarks, our teachers are highly educated, skilled and committed individuals, whose professionalism should be recognised and commended. Professionalism in any regulated field is a matter not only of a particular qualification but of a personal commitment to a set of standards and to being the very best practitioner that you can be. That holds true whether you are a doctor, a nurse, a social worker, an accountant, an engineer or a teacher. As a professional, you accept that you will be held to account if your practice becomes ineffective or if your actions fall below those standards that you and all your peers have promised to uphold. Professionalism is a commitment to the collective good rather than individual self-interest. A strong, effective professional body underpins that commitment.”
“Therefore, I will not apologise for insisting that, in line with the review report's recommendations, a public appointments process will be used for all future board members. It would be a serious failure on my part if I did not use the Bill to ensure that a future board does not collapse into division and infighting once again. <BR /> <BR />That having been said, I recognise that, in order for it to be effective, GTCNI's board will require the input of experienced teachers and an understanding of the realities of life in the classroom. That is why, in regulations to be brought forward in support of the Bill, the new board will consist of 12 people — the Chairman asked me to clarify that — and 50% of its members will be required to be GTCNI-registered teachers.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Bill can address only the historical failures that undermined the work of GTCNI, correct the legislative weaknesses that hindered its work and ensure that there is timely, well-informed decision-making to support its operational effectiveness. Consensus, not conflict, must be the hallmark of its future leadership. Some have already expressed the view that the new board will not be sufficiently independent of the Department. My response to that suggestion is to repeat that the 2021 board effectiveness review, which was based on council members' feedback, found that GTCNI had the worst-performing board that its consultants had encountered, having undertaken 645 similar reviews.”
“<BR /> <BR />I asked whether we could we rename the body, because people will associate the name with their experience of the past and with the report on its dysfunctional nature. Having asked that question, I found that it is not straightforward to repeal in law the name that is associated with the General Teaching Council for Northern Ireland. That would have required more work and could have delayed the Bill. That is why we have proposed a much reformed GTCNI. Obviously, it will create challenges in repairing the reputational damage that is associated with the past GTCNI. I want to put my efforts into that, but, ultimately, it will be for the new board to repair that reputation and rebuild trust among the profession and the wider education sector.”
“<BR /> <BR />The leader of the Opposition and others quite rightly asked this legitimate question: why not dissolve, dismantle and create a new body? I would ask the Minister of Education that question if I were on the opposite Benches. I did ask that very same question, and I have no doubt that, as officials engage with the Committee, they will explain all the processes that have been followed to improve GTCNI and why the decision has been taken to reform it through this Bill. Fundamentally, you would be asking me to bring legislation to the Assembly to dissolve an NDPB and to then create an identical body with the same functions. The reform functions are in the Bill, and that is exactly what would be in a new body, were we to dissolve GTCNI.”
“That is, to my mind, the most damning indictment of all against the old GTCNI. <BR /> <BR />One Member said that opportunities for improvement from the report have come and gone over the past number of years. There has been significant improvement, and that is why GTCNI has been removed from special measures. I referenced in my opening comments the significant transformations that GTCNI staff have achieved under the supervision of the Department of Education. It is only right that we acknowledge the significant progress that those staff have been able to make. That quiet, behind-the-scenes progress that GTCNI staff have achieved over the past four years has convinced me that a renewed GTCNI is well placed to deliver the reforms.”
“The quality of our teachers is the foundation on which our high educational standards are built, and the establishment of a strong and effective professional body will directly support the efforts of every teacher in that. I would be surprised if schools did not agree with my agenda on what I am trying to achieve in the Bill, so I do not think that there is a conflict between my agenda and what schools want. <BR /> <BR />I fully recognise that a majority of teachers have come to see GTCNI as almost invisible, delivering little that is of value to them while demanding an annual fee. Members have touched on the fee issue. That perceived invisibility stems directly from the historical failure of those who were supposed to provide the body with leadership and direction.”
“I thank Members for their contributions to the debate. I will pick up on some of their questions at the end of my closing remarks. Mr Sheehan referred to wanting to make sure that the matter is taken forward based on what schools want, not the Minister's agenda. I am not quite clear where the conflict is between what I want and what schools want: our positions are the same. I want a General Teaching Council Bill that protects and strengthens the teaching profession in Northern Ireland. The Bill recognises the high standards that already exist while safeguarding them and demonstrating that the public trust in our teachers remains well founded.”
“Its intention is simple: to provide our teachers with the robust and effective professional body that they deserve while raising teacher standards without compromising the quality of the workforce. Our teachers enjoy a unique level of public trust. In return, they are expected to be technically excellent educators and to demonstrate characteristics such as honesty, integrity and trustworthiness. Those should inform their practice and be modelled for their pupils, which can help to shape the values that those pupils will, in turn, take forward into adulthood. Professionalism among our teachers is already the norm. The Bill seeks to support and strengthen that by ensuring that teachers have a professional body that sets, expects and guards the highest standards for all. I commend the Bill to the House.”
“Rather than adding to teachers' existing workloads, we envisage that, by making those part of a formalised process, teachers will, in most cases, simply need to record the professional learning and development that they are undertaking. <BR /> <BR />I recognise that those developments represent two significant changes and that each raises issues for teachers, trade unions and oversight bodies such as the Education Committee. The Department has therefore already offered a commitment that the powers will not be commenced immediately and that that will happen only after there have been suitable consultations. <BR /> <BR />That summarises the Bill's key elements.”
“Secondly, the Bill will permit GTCNI to require all teachers to periodically validate their registration again by demonstrating their continuing participation in professional learning. All student teachers learn the importance of reflecting on their classroom practice to identify specific learning needs and areas where their practice could be improved. Most regulated professions require their members to demonstrate that their knowledge and skills remain up to date if they wish to continue to practise in that field. Our intention is to give greater prominence to the importance of career-long teacher professional learning, raising teacher standards and, ultimately, improving learning outcomes for all our pupils.”
“<BR /> <BR />When legislating, it is important that Departments plan for future needs where those can be reasonably anticipated. The Bill will therefore provide two powers that other teaching regulators already use and that could serve to strengthen the profession and the teaching workforce here. It will provide for a new class of provisional registration for teachers. It is envisaged that that would allow someone whose initial teaching qualification was judged to have minor deficits against GTCNI's qualification standards to be allowed to teach for a period, after which they would receive full registration, having addressed their deficits, or lose their provisional registration and be ineligible to continue to teach.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Bill will see GTCNI continue to be funded through annual registration fees. Teacher registration and regulation safeguard the quality of our teaching workforce, and annual fees allow those things to be delivered without adding to the pressures on the education budget. Registration fees are charged by professional bodies and regulators throughout the United Kingdom, and it is hard to argue that teachers should pay nothing to belong to their professional body. However, it will be a matter for the GTCNI's new board to review its financial position and determine whether any future fee increase is required. In giving GTCNI greater autonomy over its financial future, the Department will no longer have any approval role in the setting of fees.”
“It will be given a broad range of sanctions, from reprimands and conditional registration orders to suspension or prohibition orders. The Bill will require those facing allegations, and relevant witnesses, to participate in its investigation and fitness-to-practise proceedings and will place a duty on employing authorities and schools to share relevant information with GTCNI. <BR /> <BR />The Bill will establish two new criminal offences covering individuals who falsely claim to hold GTCNI registration or who supply false information to secure GTCNI registration. While such cases are uncommon, a small number have arisen, so we will give GTCNI the ability to respond strongly, ensuring the safety of pupils and, in doing so, protecting the reputation of the wider profession.”
“I accepted that assessment, so the Bill will now see GTCNI's retention, the reform of its board and the correction of legislative weaknesses that have to date prevented GTCNI from regulating the profession in the manner that was originally envisaged. <BR /> <BR />I will move on to some of the policy changes that the Bill will deliver. I have set out the compelling need to reform GTCNI's board. The second core element will be to create a legally robust framework, allowing GTCNI to effectively investigate and, where necessary, take disciplinary action on allegations of unacceptable professional conduct or serious professional incompetence that it receives. GTCNI will convene independent investigatory and fitness-to-practise panels without board involvement or influence.”
“The scale of that transformation suggests that GTCNI's staff and structures were always fundamentally correct and that the leadership and operational difficulties identified in 2021 stemmed principally from the body's dysfunctional leadership council. <BR /> <BR />Earlier this year, I received an options analysis and supporting business case that examined many potential methods for replacing GTCNI. Given GTCNI's recent strong performance, that included an option to retain and reform GTCNI rather than dissolve it. The analysis found that retaining and reforming GTCNI provided the quickest and most cost-effective way forward, delivering all the desired functions with the lowest associated risks while avoiding the time, costs and complexities involved in closing one non-departmental public body to establish an identical replacement.”
“<BR /> <BR />At the same time, under departmental oversight, the GTCNI staff team has managed to transform its operation. It has not simply been handling new teacher registrations; it has reduced application processing times and completed a major upgrade to its IT platform and critical teacher registration database. That replaced an obsolete system and was a critical upgrade that successive councils had failed to progress. Despite the uncertainty over its future, the GTCNI staff team has built a settled staffing structure, helping to protect the organisation's experience and expertise. It has enhanced all aspects of the body's information management processes, systematically resolving all the governance and accountability issues that it inherited from the old council, and it successfully exited special measures in December 2024.”
“Teachers in any grant-aided school here are legally required to hold GTCNI teacher registration, and the then Minister also therefore decided that, pending the body's replacement, GTCNI staff would, operating under direct departmental oversight, continue to work to register new teachers. <BR /> <BR />Since then, my officials have been working to follow through on those decisions. The Department has undertaken a public consultation and a teacher engagement exercise, seeking views on a GTCNI replacement and the roles and functions that it should deliver. In each case, a majority of respondents felt that all GTCNI's functions were important and that they should be retained, since they were regarded as directly supporting the quality of our teaching workforce.”
“<BR /> <BR />Given that assessment, the review recommended that GTCNI be dissolved and replaced, and that the Department should consult on what form a replacement body should take. It specifically recommended that if a new body were to be established, it should be overseen by a much smaller board, the members of which would all be selected on the basis of their skills and experience and chosen through a public appointments process. <BR /> <BR />In December 2021, the then Education Minister, Michelle McIlveen, announced her acceptance of the recommendations of the review report and her decision, in line with those recommendations, to stand down GTCNI's leadership council with immediate effect.”
“Despite those efforts, by mid-2021, over one third of the council's membership had either resigned or been withdrawn by their nominating body, citing dysfunctionality, toxicity and unprofessional behaviour within the council as the reasons for their departure. <BR /> <BR />In response, the Department commissioned an independent effectiveness review of GTCNI's council and committees, which reported in autumn 2021. It concluded that the leadership of the body was irredeemably divided, with such low levels of trust among its members that it could see no way for the body to be salvaged and brought back into compliance with normal governance requirements. Based on members' feedback, the consultants assessed the leadership council as being the worst-performing board that they had ever encountered.”
“Approval of the minutes of previous meetings often required hours of debate, leaving no time for the consideration of any other business. That led to essential operational decisions being left untaken, governance failures being left unaddressed, and GTCNI staff resources being squandered on internal, unproductive work that was of no value to teachers or the wider profession. It would not be unfair to say that, had it been a concerted strategy to render GTCNI ineffective and destroy teachers' confidence in the body, it scarcely could have been more successful. <BR /> <BR />In trying to remedy matters, the Department placed the body into special measures on two occasions, offering additional support and oversight to try to stabilise the very troubled ship.”
“That led to the pursuit of different agendas within the council and, over time, gave rise to entrenched positions being adopted. <BR /> <BR />The election and nomination processes that were used also led to some members coming on to the council through their own self-assessment, with very limited understanding of public-sector governance and accountability standards or strategic leadership. Some also lacked any appreciation of their responsibility, as board members, to take decisions that were solely in the best interests of GTCNI. <BR /> <BR />Relationships among council members deteriorated, with council and committee meetings becoming openly adversarial. Rather than seeking to build consensus, decision-making was characterised by partisan voting.”
“<BR /> <BR />I begin by reminding Members of the breadth of the GTCNI's problems, doing so to illustrate why the Bill is needed at this time. GTCNI was established with a large 33-person leadership council, which was made up of 14 elected teachers, five teaching union representatives, 10 nominees from educational stakeholders and four departmental public appointees. That slant towards a representative membership was intended to ensure that GTCNI's decision-making was always well informed by a broad overview of the needs of the education system. In latter years, that approach proved problematic, since board members repeatedly struggled to separate their decision-making in council from the preferences of the bodies that they represented.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. The General Teaching Council for Northern Ireland, commonly known as GTCNI, was established as a non-departmental public body (NDPB) under the Education (Northern Ireland) Order 1998. It was intended to be the professional body for our teachers, setting and maintaining professional standards, setting qualification requirements to teach in our schools and taking prompt action where a teacher's conduct or competence was unacceptable. It was also established to provide the Department with advice on teaching standards and teachers' professional development needs, helping us to better support our current teachers and future school leaders. Regrettably, GTCNI has consistently struggled to fulfil those goals.”
“On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker, is it in order for a Member to give one explanation as to why they were not in the Chamber, only for it to be found that they were actually conducting a media interview outside the Chamber? She did not give that as a reason. Is it in order for the Member to have said what she said in respect of that? Can she verify whether she was out of the Chamber doing media interviews?”
“to develop the plan. I am happy to work with the Finance Minister. However, I will point colleagues, including those in his party, to the comments that the Finance Minister made only last weekend about the financial pressures that face the Executive. We should be honest with the public about the financial choices that need to be made and about the realities that we in the Department of Education have to deal with. I will continue to prioritise those who require support, but the first priority has always been children with special educational needs. They are my priority. Universal provision for multimillionaires' kids and families is not my priority. It may be the priority and aspiration for others in the House, but it is not mine.”
“However, as other Members mentioned during the debate, the financial reality is stark. As a result of the Education Authority having an overcommitment in excess of £280 million this year on inescapable and pre-committed pressures, the resources are simply not available to me to expand access to free school meals. <BR /> <BR />Today's motion and a number of Members referenced the school holiday food grant scheme, and, similarly, the issues that I have highlighted pertain to that. The motion asks the:”
“It is not unreasonable for me to ask those who advocate it this question: what would you do if you were in my position? What priority would you place on universal free school meals in comparison with the many other pressures that exist in the Department of Education? <BR /> <BR />The official Opposition can, of course, table aspirational motions such as this, and we can all support and agree with the sentiment that is behind them, but, as Minister, I must ensure that any policy changes are financially sustainable and practically deliverable. Unfortunately, the proposals in the Opposition motion are neither. I am fully aware of the evolving nature of free school meal entitlement in England, Scotland and Wales, and I have spoken to the approach that they are taking and where I want us to get to.”