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 4 of 126.
“I do not believe that a single Member would stand up and say, "No inspections are allowed in our nursing homes". They would not do it — quite rightly. You should not call for that. It would be wrong. Why is it different when it comes to education? Why is it different to trade off workload pressures with an appropriate inspection regime that helps school improvement and can help to ensure that appropriate child safeguarding measures are in place?”
“While I absolutely understand and agree with all the frustrations that many Members have articulated on teachers' behalf about the stressful environment that they are in and the workload pressures that they are under — that is why we are taking forward the reform of our education system, and that will take time — let us never get to a place where we trade off the frustrations about workload and pressures in our school environment with children's safety. We would not do it for our elderly people in nursing homes, the young children who are involved with social services or those who are in the early years settings that are regulated by the Department of Health and the RQIA. It would not matter how much pressure those public-sector workers were under in the health service or social services.”
“However, when it comes to actually implementing a process that will address workload, I am having to do that in an environment where the Sinn Féin Finance Minister is not giving me the resources that I need. The schools that I visit that want budget increases are not blaming me. They expect me to stand up and fight for them in the Executive, which I am doing. <BR /> <BR />There cannot, however, be a trade-off between workload and children's safety.”
“<BR /> <BR />Since the Bill was approved by the Executive and introduced to the Assembly, not one iota of it has changed — not one clause, principle or word of substance. The only thing that has changed is the position of Sinn Féin. There has been much talk of workload, which I am addressing in a meaningful way. I would go further and faster if more resources were provided by the Department of Finance. Some of the 27 recommendations that were identified by the independent panel on teacher workload require resources. Do you know the pressure that I am under from the Sinn Féin Finance Minister to make cuts? "Find £600 million and cut it in your Education Department". That is Sinn Féin. We can all talk in the Chamber about workload and supporting our teachers.”
“When you approve a Bill and engage in the Executive, the draft legislation is produced and brought forward and, for whatever reason, you are then against it, you have to create the drama. You have to throw up the smokescreen. I have been in politics long enough to know how the game works. That is what has gone on with Sinn Féin in the past 48 hours. Pat has pulled rank. He has given the order, and now we have the smokescreen that has been created by Sinn Féin. That is distraction politics. That is what you do. Maybe the real reason will come out in due course. I have not lost anything today. I fear that it is the children to whom we ought to be giving protection who could lose as a result of that.”
“The arrogance — the absolute arrogance. I have not lost anything today. Do you want to know who will lose if we do not get the Bill passed? Children. Children will lose. Maybe it is of no concern to Mr Baker that we do not have an effective inspection regime to identify child safeguarding issues. He uses it as a political game. I think that the public will see that for what it is: a frenzy that that party has whipped up, claiming to speak on behalf of teachers. Trust me: Sinn Féin does not speak on behalf of teachers. The party is using that. <BR /> <BR />Other Members have raised what I regard as legitimate issues, which, I trust, we will be able to address. I will seek to do that. However, there has not been one change to the Bill that Sinn Féin approved. No amount of spin and distraction, which is what it is, will change that.”
“— a U-turn, that would say to me that I had lost the confidence of those Members. It appears to me that the Sinn Féin leadership team has lost the confidence of rank-and-file Sinn Féin MLAs. <BR /> <BR />I will give way to Mr Baker.”
“That is of concern. Is it because of Mr Carroll? Is it because of Mr O'Toole? Is it because of the by-election results in Dublin Central and Galway West? Is it because of Mr Sheehan personally? I do not know. He got up in the Chamber today and said, "I speak for Sinn Féin". That is duly noted. On education, he speaks for Sinn Féin. I know that he has not been on the Executive. Is that a problem for him? I do not know. Maybe the Sinn Féin ministerial team has lost the confidence of its Assembly group. If, as a Minister from the DUP, I had taken legislation to the Executive that my ministerial colleagues had approved but DUP Members behind me then dictated that I do —”
“Why did it not continue to block the legislation, which it had blocked since November 2024? Sinn Féin says that it is such appalling legislation. I would never let appalling legislation out of the Executive. If I felt that legislation was that bad, I would not let it out of the Executive. I would exercise our veto. Sinn Féin has a veto, but it did not exercise it for this Bill; in fact, it engaged with me to get to the Bill that is before us today. Why the U-turn? <BR /> <BR />I give way to Mr Buckley.”
“If the Bill before us is so obnoxious and so intimidatory, as the Sinn Féin Members who spoke said that it is, towards the teaching profession, why was Sinn Féin silent at the Executive?”
“The First Minister asked me a series of questions to which I provided responses, and we then changed the legislation by removing the provisions to do with fines and potential court action. I had a protracted period of engagement directly with Sinn Féin, and, when the legislation was approved, there was not one word of opposition from any Sinn Féin Minister on the Executive: not one word. <BR /> <BR />My party has approved legislation going through the Executive, and I and my colleagues on the Executive have said, "We're not blocking this. We are letting it go through but are indicating that we are opposed to it for the following reasons". I know that Mr Sheehan has never been on the Executive, but I have, and that is the normal way in which Ministers and parties articulate that they are opposed to legislation.”
“The process that I outlined commenced when I submitted a policy paper to the Executive in November 2024. People said, "It is not the right time. There is industrial action taking place". I worked to resolve that industrial action. We got pay for our teachers, which showed my support for them, and they now have pay parity with a lot of their counterparts across the water. I addressed that issue by showing my support — financial support — for our teachers, whom I deeply value. It was still not the right time to introduce the legislation, however. Sinn Féin wanted me to engage on it, and I did. Michelle O'Neill asked me to meet Caoimhe Archibald, the Minister for the Economy. I met the Minister and talked through the issues in the legislation. After that meeting, I continued to update the Executive.”
“Sinn Féin is holding up the 16-to-18 legislation. That is the contradictory position that Mr Sheehan outlined. On the one hand, Sinn Féin says that legislation gets put through the Executive because it is for the Assembly to decide, but, on the other hand, it continues to block the 16-to-18 legislation drafted by the Office of the Legislative Counsel. That legislation has been sitting ready to be introduced in the Assembly for a long time. No Minister has objected to it. Sinn Féin says, on the one hand, that the inspection Bill got to the House because that is what you do — you just put it in to the Assembly — but, on the other hand, says, "Oh, no, no. You're not going to get your 16-to-18 legislation". There is a different approach. <BR /> <BR />I still do not know why Sinn Féin has done this with inspection legislation.”
“Let me just elaborate a little more, Mr Brooks, and then I will give way. <BR /> <BR />Is it because Sinn Féin has not been able to withstand pressure from the leader of the Opposition? People have said that, in the past 48 hours, Mr Carroll came out against the Bill, the SDLP came out against it, and Sinn Féin was not able to resist the pressure. What is the reason for the change? Mr Brooks might be able to help me.”
“He is quite right to articulate the position that he holds, but is his policy dictating what Sinn Féin is now doing? Is that a concern for West Belfast? I do not know.”
“Again, that is revealing of the mindset and attitude of Sinn Féin, as articulated by Mr Sheehan. It confirms what I said at the start of my speech: this is the new way in which Sinn Féin intends to operate the Executive. When Michelle O'Neill approves something being on the agenda and Sinn Féin Ministers approve its going through the Executive, that is not worth the paper that it is written on. That is what Sinn Féin has said today about this legislation and how it will now operate the Executive. The policy that has been outlined by Sinn Féin causes me huge concern for the effective administration of the Executive. I still have not got to the bottom of why it has carried out a U-turn. Is it because of Mr Carroll? It has been speculated that Sinn Féin is afraid of Mr Carroll.”
“That is a new way of doing business in the Assembly and through the Executive, and his party is applying it to this legislation. Mr Sheehan wants me to give way.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I thank the Members from across the Chamber who contributed to the debate. At times, the debate was somewhat more robust than I might have expected for a Bill that received unanimous support at the Executive. <BR /> <BR />I will get to the substance of some of the points that Members made, and they did so very sincerely. The key question that many are asking is this: why has Sinn Féin performed a U-turn? I still cannot understand it. Why the abrupt departure from previously agreed ground? Sinn Féin has articulated in the Chamber a new approach to governing in the Executive. Do not trust that any decision that it puts through the Executive will be binding in the Assembly. That is what Sinn Féin has said today, and it was articulated by Mr Sheehan.”
“If they could absent themselves from obstructing inspection, all of us would be in a better place, but they have not given that commitment. Will she call on them to do that?”
“The Member might want to seek some information in due course, and I will try to provide that. <BR /> <BR />Mr Carroll helpfully highlighted how the health trade unions remove areas from their strike action. The RQIA has a legal right to inspect; that is a legal requirement so the health trade unions never invoke in that regard. Will the Member call for the teaching unions to remove obstruction of inspection as part of their industrial leverage when they go on strike? I have asked them to do so. If they were to commit and agree to that, it would be of a lot of help in the process. Does she agree that trade unions should not use inspection as leverage in industrial action, as they did as recently as last year, given how many areas they can use? I support their right to do so, even though I do not want them to do so.”
“On school improvement, 10 schools were put into formal intervention to support them because they were not providing the right academic support, and 13 schools have required further follow-up. That is the information that should lead us to vote accordingly, not hyperbole politics and misrepresentation. Considered information should inform how we take forward the Bill, and I welcome the Member's view on how we should do so, despite the emails that he has received from some of his constituents. In due time, people will, I believe, see that this is the right thing to do for the children.”
“I reassure the Member that I am aware of the case. It has to follow the normal processes in how it is considered. However, the inspection process has been able to identify the issue, which is why I welcome the fact that, as I mentioned, inspection has to be information-driven. I have received the same emails. I have received them from DUP voters. The easy thing for me to do politically would be not to move on the matter, but that would not be the right thing for me to do. I will have to lead my constituency as to why we are doing this. <BR /> <BR />The information that the Member referenced and the basis on which we should take decisions is that, in 2024-25, two schools needed urgent child-related action as a result of inspection. Similarly, in 2025-26, two schools required further inspections because of safeguarding concerns.”
“The purpose of the Bill is to ensure that an effective inspection process is in place to identify safeguarding practices where we do not know of cases. We need to make sure that the framework gives the best possible opportunity to capture information that may show that safeguarding is not being effectively carried out in our schools. That is the purpose of the Bill.”
“I appreciate the Member giving way. I am aware of the case, just as I am aware of a number of cases that have been brought to my attention. Those are the cases that we know of and that are being investigated.”
“We do not need to create any fear about the ethos of our schools being undermined by the inclusion of clause 2. We can welcome it in that respect. Hopefully, that has given the Member some reassurance.”
“Some Members have talked about wanting to amend clause 3, but I have not yet heard anyone say that they want to amend clause 2. On the inclusion of clause 2, while it was not a clear, direct judgement of the Supreme Court, it was critical of the Northern Ireland education system in that judgement because RE was outwith the scope of the inspection process. That is why we need primary legislation to remove that prohibition so that the inspectorate is able to carry out that inspection. Largely, many of the denominations were not carrying out inspections, even through the transferor representatives on their boards of governors. Many RE teachers will welcome the inclusion of RE in the inspection process, because many teachers want the inspectorate to affirm that they are doing the right thing.”
“They have nothing to fear from that being inspected, and, where it can be improved, as inspection does carry the purpose of improvement, that will enhance the teaching of religious education in our schools. I hope that that has assured the Member. Far from diluting religious instruction and education in our schools, I am seeking to enhance it.”
“I am happy to do so. To reassure the Member, there is no opt-out when it comes to teaching religious education in our schools. Quite the opposite: it is a legal requirement that religious education and religious instruction are carried out in our schools. That includes acts of collective worship that take place in our schools. I am delighted to have been in so many schools where there is collective worship on a daily occurrence, which ought to be encouraged. <BR /> <BR />Mainstream denominations have welcomed inspection because they want to make sure, as we introduce a new curriculum on RE, which is being developed under Professor Noel Purdy's leadership, that that has academic rigour.”
“I refer the Member to the comments that I made to Mr Mathison. Of course, I have indicated that there is a willingness to engage and to look at issues of concern. I said that earlier in the debate.”
“That is not criminalisation, so Mr McCrossan and others should resist using that kind of language. The matter would be referred to the GTCNI, and it is for it, the professional body, to make the determination. Do we not think that it will take a proportionate approach to the issue, or do you not trust the professional body for teachers either? Mr McCrossan should watch his language and not misrepresent the Bill. That is the approach that is being proposed and to which Sinn Féin agreed.”
“I appreciate the Member's giving way. This is why the language that we use today is so important. Mr McCrossan has again said that the Bill will "criminalise our teachers". Sinn Féin said that the original Bill would criminalise our teachers. That is why I worked with it. I did not agree with the party, but I worked with it to get the Bill out of the Executive, and I removed the financial penalties and potential conviction, which is in line with the Republic of Ireland and Great Britain. That would lead not to a criminal sanction but to the alternative that Sinn Féin agreed — I will go into more detail about the length of the discussions that I had with it, which will be revealing — which was the referral mechanism to the professional conduct body.”
“Does the Member agree that there is a contradiction in the Sinn Féin position when it says that it does not support this in respect of teachers but it does support police officers being sanctioned for refusing to engage with the Police Ombudsman and prison officers being sanctioned for refusing to engage with the Criminal Justice Inspection? Sinn Féin supports nurses, doctors and other medical professionals being charged when they refuse to engage with RQIA. It supports child settings being inspected by RQIA. Is there not a contradiction? If Sinn Féin is to be consistent on the position that it has set out, now that Pat has announced that he is the leader of the party today — congratulations — will it now repeal all aspects of public-sector ability to refuse inspection? Would that not be the consistent thing to do?”
“On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. So far, not one comment from the Member has been about the Bill. It is just another personal assassination attempt by Sinn Féin against me. It has nothing to do with the Bill. It is purely party political and of a personal nature, which we have become used to with that lot.”
“I appreciate Mr Burrows' giving way. He is right to say that people can play to the Public Gallery and be populist on this, but that infers that every teacher somehow agrees with the representations that have been made by others. The teachers whom I know are not afraid of having a light shone on practices that may expose issues of child safeguarding; in fact, they want that. We should listen to those voices and not misrepresent the situation by saying that, somehow, all teachers feel that the only way to get their rights is to deny an inspection of things such as school improvement and child safeguarding practices; quite the opposite is the case with the members of the teaching profession whom I know.”
“I appreciate the Member giving way. Do you take the same position on the profession in the Republic of Ireland and the rest of Great Britain, where there is no inspection boycott during strike action? There have been strikes in the South and in Great Britain, and never has inspection been included in that strike action. I support the legitimate right to strike. There are countless areas in which the profession can engage, and I will mention them when I make my winding-up speech later. Why should Northern Ireland be the only jurisdiction that allows the frustration of an independent inspection process that includes assessing child safeguarding measures? Surely, child safeguarding should be beyond legitimate strike action, as it is elsewhere.”
“I find it baffling that you could have any sort of distinction.”
“When the Bill was going through the Executive, one of the requests from Sinn Féin and others was to do exactly what he has just set out. We met the trade unions. We asked them formally to enter into an agreement that would take that issue off their list of potential industrial action. There was no meeting and no response. There was silence. I am not prepared to play fast and loose with the protection of our children and young people. I will say this: the Regulation and Quality Improvement Authority (RQIA) and the Department of Health regulate early years childcare and preschool settings. They inspect them. It is an offence not to be inspected by them. Why is it OK to have that level of inspection for children in early years settings, with staff unable to refuse to cooperate, but not for children in P1 when they turn five?”
“Why is it OK to have a criminal offence for prison officers who refuse to cooperate with the inspection to the benefit of prisoners and not to have an offence for teachers — I have removed it — but a referral for professional misconduct? It is strange that Members are saying that a diluted version of the provisions in the Justice Act that apply to prison officers is not suitable for teachers. <BR /> <BR />Finally, the Member will be surprised, then, that inspection of RE, which is included in the Education Inspections Bill, should have been distinct and different. When he looks at the Justice Bill tomorrow, he will see that it has more amendments and changes to policy areas than the Bill ever introduced.”
“<BR /> <BR />The clause was already a compromise because people argued that a fine and potential criminal sentence should not exist in Northern Ireland as it does in the rest of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. Therefore, that was removed from the Bill, and clause 3, as it stands, contains a referral for professional misconduct. Will the Member agree, however, that it sits somewhat differently from the provisions in the Justice (Northern Ireland) Act 2002? Those provisions reference the powers of the Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland (CJINI) to inspect our prisons, and section 48(3) states:”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I assure the Member that I am more than happy to work with the Committee to look at that aspect of the Bill at clause 3 and see where we can find common ground on that. The offer is there for me to engage constructively with him and the Committee to address some of the unfounded concerns that have been generated over the past 48 hours. The Member is right: that is the benefit of the Committee Stage. The argument made by the Members opposite about why the Hunting with Dogs Bill should proceed was that the Committee could do the work and that the Committee was the place to look at it all and to interrogate it; it is interesting that the same argument does not suit now.”
“<BR /> <BR />If the Member is telling me that, from now on, when Sinn Féin's First Minister and Sinn Féin Ministers approve a Bill to be introduced in the Assembly, it is the Assembly, not the leadership of Sinn Féin that matters, who is running Sinn Féin? Is it your First Minister and leader, your ministerial team or the Back-Benchers on the Education Committee? Who is actually running Sinn Féin? For Sinn Féin to hold us hostage unless it gets its way and to vote down legislation for the protection of children and the improvement of schools is an appalling way to do business. Let the public see that for what it is: shameful politics from Sinn Féin. <BR /> <BR />I look forward to responding to all points raised by Members in due course.”
“Those are the threats from Mr Baker: Sinn Féin is going to block a Bill for the protection of children because it has thrown its toys out of the pram over a 'good jobs' Bill. Let that ring in Members' ears. Sinn Féin's position is a response to the 'good jobs' Bill. We are actively working through that Bill to see whether we can move forward with it, but Sinn Féin will hold everybody else hostage — it is not the first time that republicans have behaved in that way — by behaving in a despicable manner over a Bill that is designed to strengthen school inspection and the protection of children. Why is Sinn Féin opposed to that? It is inexplicable.”
“It was right for Alliance Ministers, who also approved it. <BR /> <BR />I will give way to Mr Baker.”
“It was right for Sinn Féin's Ministers, who approved it at the Executive.”
“This is the test of ours. <BR /> <BR />I look forward to hearing Members' opinions on the Bill's general principles. Let those who wish to oppose it and those who wish to hollow it out explain — Mr Baker smiles smugly, as usual — why they do not believe that the protection of children should be paramount and why they believe that we should have a substandard inspection system to that which exists in the Republic of Ireland or anywhere else in the United Kingdom. I suggest to Members that children ought not to be the playthings of political advantage, which Sinn Féin now seeks to exploit. <BR /> <BR />The Bill is right for the protection of our children and young people. It is right for school improvement. It was right for the Sinn Féin First Minister, who approved it.”
“It is only through external scrutiny that schools can truly understand where they are falling short. As Nelson Mandela said:”
“We have a responsibility to act in the best interests of children and young people. The Bill does exactly that. It ensures that independent scrutiny is not contingent, partial or optional but consistent, robust and guaranteed. Safeguarding is not a procedural issue but a moral one. History will judge us on this simple question: when we had the opportunity to strengthen protection for children, did we act or did we hesitate? <BR /> <BR />More widely, children are simply not getting a good deal. Without inspection, no one supports schools that struggle to improve and to thrive. Inspection is the engine of improvement. It shines a light on weaknesses, challenges complacency and drives schools to be better for every child. Without inspection, there is no honest mirror.”
“When it comes to the comfort of adults or the safety of children, there is no moral ambiguity. We must choose children.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Bill is small and focused, but it is critical. It protects a fundamental accountability mechanism, strengthens oversight across all areas of the curriculum and places the rights and well-being of children at its core. As we again face the potential of further industrial action in our education system, support for the smooth passage of the Bill is all the more urgent. <BR /> <BR />Let us be clear what is at stake. In 2026, are we seriously prepared to argue that our schools do not require consistent, independent scrutiny? Have the harrowing lessons of past abuse inquiries taught us nothing? When systems lack oversight, it is children who pay the price. When systems lack scrutiny, risk does not disappear. Rather, it grows in the shadows.”
“It will remove inspection from industrial relations and normalise cooperation, allowing all of our teaching workforce to experience and be empowered through the new collaborative inspection framework. <BR /> <BR />Over the past two years, we have seen what happens when inspection is allowed to function properly. Schools have entered formal intervention for the first time in a decade, gaining access to tailored and sustained support; weaknesses in safeguarding arrangements have been identified and addressed; and a programme of dissemination of effective practice has been consistently oversubscribed, demonstrating a thirst from our educators to learn from their peers across our education system. The impact is clear, the benefits real and the case for securing inspection in law undeniable.”