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 3 of 126.
“Your party put the petition of concern in the 1998 agreement.”
“All Members have discharged their responsibilities according to the processes of the Assembly. That is why they are valid petitions of concern, and that is why the amendments will now be stopped.”
“On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. Is it appropriate for the Member, who is rather irate, to say that Members have abused the use of the petition of concern?”
“Such a proposal should be taken forward in a youth justice Bill, after proper consultation and consideration, with other Departments feeding into the process, rather than via an amendment tagged on to the Justice Bill that will have profound implications for many other aspects of our society. <BR /> <BR />I appeal to those who have it within their gift to ensure that proper scrutiny takes place to step up and support those who have already signed the petition of concern. If an issue were to materialise in the future, it will be too late for them to wish that they had done something to prevent it. I would rather be on the side of proper scrutiny and consideration than of rushed legislation. I appeal to those Members who can to join us.”
“I say this to the Members who are still deliberating: set aside any other issues that may cloud the discussions and look at the changes that the amendment would make. There is a very limited opportunity to make an intervention. <BR /> <BR />If the Members who have brought forward the amendment decide to propose it — I appeal to them not to do so — there is only one way in which it can be prevented from becoming law. Why is that important? It is important not just from a justice point of view. The Youth Justice Agency engages with our schools. Where will the support be if the situation changes? I am deeply concerned that the withdrawal of that deterrent will undermine the practice of discipline in our schools.”
“Mr Speaker, with your indulgence, my statement relates to the petition of concern, which, if valid, will be debated along with the group 6 amendments but has to be signed before we get to that debate. That is the context in which I make this contribution. When we get to the debate, it will be past the post. <BR /> <BR />I appeal to Members not to consider the implications just from a justice point of view. Jim Gamble has spoken at length on this. He has intervened in a powerful way, particularly for those who are reluctant to sign a petition of concern, about the priority that should be afforded in considering those dilemmas that people feel.”
“I speak in advance of the continuation of the Justice Bill's Consideration Stage today, which, potentially, will deal with the important group of amendments associated with the minimum age of criminal responsibility. The debate will be important, and I urge Members —.”
“It is really important that we continue to use legislation to send the message, but it has to be more than just a message; it has to be followed up by successful implementation. The previous law has not been implemented in the way that it should have been. I welcome the Member's support for my colleague Mr Frew's amendment.”
“I appreciate the Member's giving way. I chaired the Justice Committee when Lord Morrow's private Member's Bill came through. Like the Member, I am concerned at the PSNI's failure to properly take forward prosecutions for payment for sexual services. The Assembly passed that legislation a number of years ago. Most parties supported it, although Alliance did not. Supporting it was the right thing to do then, and the amendment tabled by Paul Frew is the right one. <BR /> <BR />I had young people in the Assembly at the time of the passage of Lord Morrow's Bill. The female students said that they found the objectification of women abhorrent, and they supported the inclusion of the criminalisation of payment for sexual services. The debate that took place with the boys was interesting.”
“As a society, we start to tackle disadvantage by opening new doors and creating new opportunities and better life chances, but we will not do so without regular, consistent external inspection. We can always do better, and we should never stop striving to do better, especially for the most disadvantaged and vulnerable. This is an area where we can and must do better. Our children deserve nothing less. I commend the Bill to the House.”
“This is focused and proportionate legislation. It closes a long-standing gap in our legal framework, brings us more closely in line with other jurisdictions, supports improvement and, most importantly, protects children. Every parent whom I have ever met wants to know whether their child is likely to get a good education at their school. The question before us is simple: are we prepared to ensure that a fundamental safeguard in our education system can operate consistently, effectively and without obstruction? I believe that we should be. <BR /> <BR />We should never forget that the ETI's primary purpose is to champion the right of every child to a decent education. Above all else, the inspectorate is a champion for children. We want to see high standards and positive outcomes for all children.”
“It may be an uncomfortable truth for Sinn Féin, but that is exactly what happened.”
“That is not the truth. I am nearly finished because I know that Members want to vote. It is nearly 9.00 pm, and this is the start of many a long night as we approach the end of the mandate. I have outlined the truth, and it is an uncomfortable truth for Sinn Féin. It did not support the Bill at the start. Sinn Féin engaged with me directly. It authorised Caoimhe Archibald to sit with me in a room, which I did, and we worked through the Bill. The First Minister asked me, "Can you remove these elements of the Bill?", and I removed the elements that Sinn Féin did not want and replaced them with an alternative, which Sinn Féin supported. Not only did it then support it, but after that direct engagement with Sinn Féin, the First Minister approved it on the agenda, and it went through the Executive unopposed. That is the truth.”
“Sorry, if the Member wants to stand up and call me a liar, she should feel free to stand up and say, "The Minister's telling lies", and I will happily correct her.”
“I see no Ministers here. Sinn Féin did not object.”
“The Chief Whip of Sinn Féin says, "Tell the truth." The truth is that the Bill was agreed at the Executive, it was endorsed by Sinn Féin, and the First Minister put it on the agenda. I do not know how many times I need to say that. The facts speak for themselves.”
“I cannot prevent any Member from tabling an amendment that states, "Clause 3 does not stand part of the Bill". I cannot prevent any Member from doing that, and the vote will happen accordingly. This is now an Assembly Bill. It was approved at the Executive by Sinn Féin and the DUP.”
“Encourage the unions to step forward to do that. I would certainly welcome their doing that. <BR /> <BR />I recognise the sincerity with which Mr Mathison and Michelle Guy raised their issues. I have given an assurance that I will work with them to seek a way to address those concerns and ensure that there are appropriate guard rails around what a referral to the professional body would look like. There should be scope to amend the Bill to reflect that in a way that would be helpful. That is the approach that I intend to take, and I will work with the Committee to do that. <BR /> <BR />Ultimately, though, this is Assembly legislation, and this is the point at which I agree with the Chairman of the Education Committee. I cannot prevent a single Member from tabling an amendment.”
“If, as part of their collective action, they prevented inspection in all areas, I think that most Members would agree that that would be debilitating for the school system. I ask Members to appeal to the trade unions to take inspection off the table voluntarily. This legislation would not be necessary if they were to make an agreement. I asked them to make an agreement with me. Sinn Féin and the Alliance Party asked me at the Executive table to engage with the unions. I did engage with them, and they did not provide a response. If the trade unions were to step forward and announce that they would no longer use inspection as part of industrial action, we would not need clause 3. They have not said that. Maybe they will, and maybe that could be a justification for some Members taking the approach that they have argued for.”
“However, I trust that the Committee will be able to navigate through a Bill that includes RE inspections. <BR /> <BR />Mr Mathison mentioned that things are fragile on the issue of inspection, but there is not going to be a perfect time to do this. In my view, this legislation should have been dealt with over a decade ago. We should not have had nearly a decade of action short of strike, which frustrated inspection. That would have been the best time to have this Bill. I suspect that there is never a good time to manage something like this through the legislative programme, but, ultimately, it is the right thing to do because the intent behind it is important, and that is where we need to remain focused. <BR /> <BR />I appeal to Members to use whatever influence they have with the trade unions.”
“I think that the Bill is the most appropriate vehicle for dealing with that issue in as timely a fashion as possible. I appreciate that the Education Committee has a heavy workload. Mr Sheehan said that there were multiple Bills, and he is correct.”
“I do not want the debate to descend to point at which it did before we broke, but this is not the place to have that conversation when we are discussing inspection and child safeguarding. I say to the Member that his party is the biggest party in the Executive, much as that pains me. You are the biggest party. Your party holds the position of First Minister of Northern Ireland. Sinn Féin has a veto. It put the Bill on the agenda, and it approved it at the Executive. That is what the biggest party in the Executive did, and now it has U-turned in the Assembly. <BR /> <BR />A couple of Members commented on the actual substance of the Bill. I think that I have addressed most of the concerns that were raised. Mr Mathison spoke about the question of RE inspections being a part of the Bill.”
“I am always happy to be corrected by Mr Sheehan.”
“It is the tried and trusted tactic, particularly from the three Sinn Féin members of the Education Committee. Mr O'Toole referred to it in a previous debate. Let us make the Minister the bogeyman. Let us make him the problem. That avoids the difficult issues, you see. It is too easy to pin it on the Minister and say, "You're to blame, you're to blame". That is why I need broad shoulders and to take responsibility and be alert. We know the tactics that are being deployed. I could not believe it when Mr Sheehan referred in his earlier comments to unionist majority rule. That was unbelievable. He said that he would not stand for unionist majority rule and that those days are gone. My goodness, when we are talking about such an important issue, that is where Sinn Féin had to go to.”
“It is in dispute what the RCN believes should happen in schools and what many teachers and classroom assistants say they have to deal with in our schools. Whose side is the Member now on when it comes to that issue?”
“The Member had the chance to make a lengthy speech earlier. He is now trying to reframe it. On restrictive practices, has he not been following the comments that one of the parents involved in this debate has been making about his position? She is against it. She does not support your position. That is somebody who suffered restrictive practices. I suspect that the Member has heard directly from the individual, who is actively saying that Sinn Féin has got it wrong. Whose voice are you listening to? I trust that you will listen to that individual, who wants you to support the Bill. <BR /> <BR />On restrictive practices, we are working through all the issues, but the trade unions are in conflict with the Royal College of Nursing. There is not an agreed position between the teaching profession and the RCN's position.”
“I believe unequivocally that it will. <BR /> <BR />I give way to Mr Sheehan.”
“Whether it is about ensuring that safeguarding arrangements are rigorously assessed, that provision for children with special educational needs is properly evaluated or that all aspects of the curriculum are subject to scrutiny, the focus should consistently be on protecting and promoting the interests of children. Ultimately, the only test that matters is whether the Bill will make the system better for children.”
“Trust is not preserved by shielding institutions from scrutiny; rather it is earned through transparency and accountability. The lesson is clear and unavoidable: across every walk of life from the most powerful offices to the most trusted professions independent scrutiny is not optional; it is essential. Without it, silence prevails, and, where silence prevails, injustice follows. <BR /> <BR />Every element of the legislation is grounded in the principle of what is in the best interests of children. Their safety should not be a pawn in an industrial relations game.”
“Those are not my words; they are the words of the Education and Training Inspectorate. That view was endorsed by the Northern Ireland Audit Office, which Mr Martin referred to in his contribution, and was evidence of its concerns. <BR /> <BR />Every institution that serves the public must answer to the public and must be tested, questioned and held to account. We know that not from theory, but, sadly, Members, from hard, painful experiences in institutions of various types that had been highly respected. Time and again, historical abuse inquiries have shown us the same truth: when scrutiny is absent, harm takes root. It does not matter about the badge, the title or the profession. No role is so important and no institution so respected that it can stand above independent oversight.”
“Some of the criticisms of the Bill are based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the facts: for example, the suggestion that action short of strike has not impacted on safeguarding is simply wrong. During those periods, only documentation was provided. There was no observation of practice. That is not susceptible to an alternative interpretation. That is not just my position; I will quote the Education and Training Inspectorate. Inspection report after inspection report during action short of strike came to that conclusion. One stated that inspectors were:”
“Non-cooperation with inspection will be referred to the GTCNI, which is the profession's regulatory body.”
“By providing clarity, the Bill removes inspection from the arena of industrial dispute and places it firmly where it belongs, as a shared professional responsibility. <BR /> <BR />Members have raised concerns about punitive action or threats of sanction. I reassure the House that the Bill's approach is deliberately measured and proportionate. It reflects a belief that the profession is best placed to uphold its own standards. Ms Sugden referred to professional autonomy: here is a professional body that regulates the conduct of its members. I trust that it would be able to be proportionate and reasonable, but, if the Assembly wishes to put safeguards around that, I am happy to engage in order for that to be done in a way that allows progress to be made.”
“There will be no potential concern about going to court and facing a prison sentence: that has all gone. There is now a referral to a professional body, about which I am happy to give an assurance to the Chairman of the Committee and to Members who have asked for it that I will work in good faith with them to seek a resolution and address any concerns that they have. However, we still need to have a measure that will remove industrial action over inspection from the table for the future. There is a clear distinction between legitimate industrial action and the obstruction of a statutory independent process that is designed to safeguard children. The ambiguity that exists in our law has allowed that distinction to become blurred, and that does not serve teachers or school leaders. Above all, it does not serve children.”
“<BR /> <BR />There will be scope to work with the Committee to make sure that there are clear parameters for that professional body, in any referral, to ensure that the level of deterrent set will be appropriate. I will be able to work constructively with Committee members on that, because they have raised the issue out of genuine concern, reflecting the representations that they have had. There is sincerity in what they have said and what Ms Sugden has said, and I trust that, as we go through the process, we will find a way to reach common ground on it. I certainly want to do that and am happy to do it. Those areas include a reprimand. There is no financial sanction: that was taken out of the Bill, because Sinn Féin wanted it to be removed.”
“Mr Sheehan referred to not having a notion about what this looks like, but he is the Deputy Chair of the Education Committee. The GTC Bill is before the Committee, and this Bill refers to the GTC Bill. The process will be a referral to the professional body, and, given that the GTCNI is the teaching profession's regulatory authority, I trust that it will be capable of ensuring a proportionate and appropriate sanction. Members may be concerned that it will not be — Mr Mathison and Michelle Guy sought assurances from me on that — and that the sanction could lead to a teacher's being dismissed, but I would never support a teacher's being suspended or dismissed from their job for refusing to engage with an inspection process.”
“Feel free to use all the other tools at your disposal, but inspection is too important"? If they use inspection, will Members come back to the Chamber and say, "Do you know what? You were right. They used the inspection process. That is wrong, and we will enthusiastically support the Bill"? We will wait and see. I hope that they have not given encouragement to unions to issue that kind of directive to their members. I know many teachers who do not support their trade unions in putting them in the difficult position of seeking to obstruct an inspection. Many teachers do not want to do that. They may want to take part in other forms of action, but they do not want to do it in that area. <BR /> <BR />Now is the time to get this right. There is a way that we can do it.”
“Sinn Féin Members repeatedly say that that should be allowed, but I will not compromise when it comes to the protection of children. Sinn Féin might want to do that, but I will not compromise on that. <BR /> <BR />The Bill is about inspection and only inspection. That is all that it relates to: no other form of industrial action. Yes, industrial relations are fragile. They are, but I ask Members this: if inspection is included, will their position of saying that that is allowed give unions the confidence to say, "We are going on strike. We will ballot our members"? That could happen as soon as tomorrow. I am aware of the conversations that are taking place. Do Members believe that it would be right to include inspection, or will they stand up and say to the unions, "Please do not do it. Please do not use inspection.”
“They can refuse to respond to communications or to parents outside working hours, to supervise extracurricular activities, to invigilate exams and to engage in performance processes, Key Stage assessments and internal tracking data. All those things are legal forms of strike action, but let us not allow child protection to be included in that. <BR /> <BR />Teachers have the right to strike, and I support their right to do so if circumstances require it, though I hope that they do not. Teachers have a very lengthy list. Why should Northern Ireland be the only part of the United Kingdom or the island of Ireland that has inspection as part of it? Why would we sacrifice the protection of our children, when no one else is prepared to do it?”
“A trade union representative was appointed to be on that review. <BR /> <BR />My relationship with trade unions is a constructive one, but I still anticipate that they will take industrial action, because they do that. That is their right. They will ballot their members, and I suspect that that could happen very soon. What I say to Members is that we should not allow that form of industrial action to include inspection. However, what can teachers do to put forward their case? I still argue that they should not do these things, but they can refuse to carry out administrative or clerical tasks, to implement new initiatives, to undertake unpaid duties and to undertake lunchtime supervision. They can have strict limits of only one meeting per term.”
“Let me respond. I think that I have one of the most effective and closest relationships with the trade unions of many an Education Minister. I worked with them very closely to ensure that teachers got increases in pay, despite the frustrations that I was having from the Executive, notwithstanding my efforts. I brought forward a ministerial direction. Despite pressures to cut the Education budget, I stood up for teachers. I took it to the Executive, and I was challenged in the Executive by the Member's party when it came to giving teachers their pay. I stood up for them and supported them. They got their pay rise, deservedly so. I have worked with the trade unions effectively on many areas, including establishing the independent review of teacher workload, which made 27 recommendations.”
“In fact, trade unions are shocked that their counterparts in Northern Ireland can deploy it. It has never happened. I do not want any teacher to ever be referred for professional misconduct. It happens, just as it does in any profession. A ruling professional body will look into the conduct of its members. We all accept that as normal and acceptable, but I do not want any teacher to go through that. I do not want them ever to be referred for non-cooperation with inspection. I never want that to happen. However, the only way that we can ensure that it does not happen is to remove inspection as part of the toolkit of deployment.”
“That cannot be right. We cannot trade off inspection against frustration. Some things ought to be beyond the reach of industrial action. I contend that inspection is one of those things, because of the critical importance that it plays in school improvement and in identifying child safeguarding issues. Surely that should put it beyond the reach of industrial action. The only way to do that is to have some form of deterrent. Otherwise, it is meaningless. <BR /> <BR />We are seeking to prevent the use of inspections in the way England, Scotland, Wales and the Republic of Ireland have prevented it. Not once has there been a financial penalty or a prosecution in the courts, because obstruction of inspection has been taken out of the options for industrial action leverage. They do not use it.”
“There is no public, outward-facing criticism of any school. The inspection process was redesigned with the unions. The unions endorsed that inspection system. They welcomed it. Overwhelmingly, those who have gone through the new inspection process have said that it was a positive experience for them. My problem with the trade unions, though, is that they continue to refuse inspection during industrial action, despite the reformation of inspection and despite the fact that, as every Member in the Chamber has said, inspection is good for education and we all support it. <BR /> <BR />Only last year, when industrial action was re-engaged for a brief period, what was deployed? Refusal to allow inspection.”
“It ensures that excellence is not an aspiration but an expectation. Put simply, what we inspect, we improve, and what we improve challenges lives. That is why I was delighted when, as soon as the action short of strike ended, principals proactively reached out and said, "Please inspect my school". They wanted to know whether they were doing the right thing; whether they could do it better; whether it could be improved. They did not fear inspection; they welcomed it. <BR /> <BR />Here is the problem with the trade union approach. The trade unions and ETI engaged directly with the Department of Education and the inspectorate and redesigned the inspection process — they changed it. No more is there a publication that says, "Your school is outstanding", "very good", "below average" or "unsatisfactory". That is gone.”
“Improvement happens when we are challenged. It happens when we are seen clearly. Most importantly, it happens when we are willing to confront the truth. That is why inspection matters. It is the moment when we stop and ask ourselves this: are we truly giving every child the education that they deserve? Every child only gets one chance: one chance at a lesson; one chance at a year; once chance at their future. Without inspection — without that external lens — it is all too easy to believe that we are doing enough, when we could be doing so much more. Inspection shines a light. Inspection shows our strengths and where we must do better. It challenges complacency. It can raise expectation. It demands that we do not settle. Inspection ensures that we do not stand still. It ensures that no child is overlooked.”
“I should have said this at the start, but forgive me: my sister is a schoolteacher. I declare the interest in the appropriate places. I have other family members who are teachers. I benefited — as you all did — from teachers. The idea that I would somehow want to undermine and attack our teaching profession is utter nonsense, and it would only be done for the reason that Mr Buckley referred to: distraction. The Bill does not undermine teachers; it is a recognition of the critical importance of teaching as a profession and of the standards that rightly accompany that status. <BR /> <BR />At its core, cooperation with inspection is a fundamental element of professional practice. Inspection is not about catching schools out; it is about helping them to improve. We talk about improvement as if it just happens on its own, but it does not.”
“I quoted one earlier. I hoped that I could find, somewhere in the deep recesses of Mr Sheehan's heart, his conscience, so I invoked Mr Mandela. Mr Sheehan will not listen to me, so I thought that he might listen to his good friend Madiba, but not even that will stir him up. <BR /> <BR />Why should the protection of a prisoner be regarded more highly than that of a child in school? Maintaining an undisrupted programme of school inspection is key to delivering an education that meets the needs of all children. <BR /> <BR />A number of Members have spoken about the importance of trusting the teaching profession and of ensuring that nothing in the Bill undermines teachers' dedication, professionalism and integrity. Let me address that point very directly. The Bill is not an attack on teachers; far from it.”
“I will ask this simple question: why should the protection of a prisoner — Sinn Féin Members are good at standing up for the rights of prisoners; some of them were in prison —.”
“You do it in the face of information. You do it in the face of clear evidence that real issues have been identified.”