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 56 of 126.
“Operational responsibility for the planning of education provision lies with the two statutory planning authorities: the Education Authority and the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools (CCMS). They conduct area-planning activity in consultation and collaboration with a number of sectoral bodies. 'Planning for Sustainable Provision: Strategic Area Plan 2022-27' and the special education strategic area plan set out the strategic direction for how the future educational needs of children and young people will be addressed through area solutions. <BR /> <BR />While the plans provide the strategic direction for the next five years, 'Operational Plan 1: 2022-24' outlines the activity to be taken forward in the first two years.”
“The Member has raised that issue on a number of occasions with me, as have other Members. Whilst I have every sympathy with the positions that are being expressed, the outworkings of how the payment impacts on universal credit is not a matter for me or my Department. It also ties in with issues around Treasury and the way in which it interfaces in that regard. I am not able to give comfort to the Member on that issue, other than to say that we have negotiated and agreed an increase that is reflected in those workers' terms and conditions. That is the right thing to do. We are also following through on the nationally negotiated pay rise for support staff, and we will seek to make sure that the funding is in place for that to take effect as well. There will be a further increase in pay for staff affected in the support staff category.”
“I will have to respond to the Member in writing about how we can do that work on the register. If he is content, I will write to him.”
“Of course, we have the settlement now from the monitoring round. I will engage with my officials on what the outworkings of that could be as we seek a resolution to this year's pay rise, which needs to be negotiated with the teachers' trade unions.”
“The Member is absolutely right about valuing our support staff. That is why I engaged proactively with the trade unions to get a resolution to the issue around the pay and grading review, which had gone on for some time. Primarily, it was about recruitment and retention in the workforce, but the outworkings of that negotiated process were the new pay scales, which will take effect this month, once the payroll goes through, and the non-consolidated payment, which will come in stage 2 of the process. <BR /> <BR />I thank the unions that worked with me during that process. It built on the negotiated outcome with teachers, where we were able to increase by double figures the percentage increase for staff on taking up office. Again, that is a refection of my commitment to supporting teachers.”
“Due to affordability considerations, the pay and grading agreement will be implemented in two stages. Stage 1 will move eligible staff on to their new pay scales with effect from 1 April 2024, while stage 2 will entail a non-consolidated payment of £2,550, pro rata, to eligible staff in lieu of back pay. The Education Authority (EA) has completed its amendments to the payroll system and will make the payments for stage 1 of the agreement this month as part of the normal pay process. Payments for stage 2 of the agreement will be made in the next financial year in line with the agreed settlement.”
“<BR /> <BR />I assure Members that the data behind RAISE is extremely robust, that it is evidence-informed and data-led and that it targets children based on evidence of deprivation and low achievement, because both are essential.”
“— I emphasise that the RAISE programme is a new approach. It is a programme that goes beyond the school gate. It aims to complement existing interventions and invest in communities that have the highest levels of educational underachievement. It is focused on improving outcomes, directly targeting investment where attainment is lowest. We are not using the single dataset of free school meal entitlement. I ask the House this: do we not need to tackle educational inequality by pooling resources, using evidence-based approaches and testing new ways of unlocking the barriers that hold young people back in the areas where the educational challenges are greatest?”
“I therefore absolutely refute the assertion in the motion that the data is not objective. The RAISE programme targets children, not institutions. It directly targets investment at areas where there are too many children who leave after 12 years of schooling without the basic skills that are needed to succeed in life. <BR /> <BR />In conclusion —”
“Whilst free school meals is an important indicator and was included, I make no apology for also wanting to examine indicators of health, crime and economic inactivity. Those are key factors in educational disadvantage. <BR /> <BR />Thirdly, the programme prioritised investment in the areas with lowest levels of attainment. Using the seven criteria created a shortlist of 256 eligible superoutput areas, with areas that had lower levels of attainment at GCSE then prioritised for investment. As the Minister of Education, I want all children and young people to reach their potential. Ultimately, the success of this programme will be determined by how well it improves educational outcomes, so it is absolutely right that I invest in the areas with the lowest levels of attainment.”
“Those seven criteria were informed by discussions with a stakeholder reference group that was put in place to support delivery of the 'A Fair Start' actions.”
“Thirty-nine per cent of pupils identified by RAISE come from those two areas, despite their representing only 26% of Northern Ireland's population, yet it is vital that we address the massive challenges faced by some smaller, remoter parts of the country. Persistent patterns of rural underperformance have been overlooked. <BR /> <BR />Secondly, the programme used a broad range of indicators to identify localities that are experiencing high levels of educational underachievement. Superoutput areas across Northern Ireland were analysed using seven criteria. Free school meals was supplemented by measures of special educational needs, pupil attendance and GCSE achievement, as well as the Northern Ireland multiple deprivation measures of income, health deprivation and crime and antisocial behaviour.”
“It is important that RAISE extend beyond the reach of Belfast and Londonderry in order to ensure that children in rural and coastal areas, who are also facing poverty and educational disadvantage, receive the support that they deserve. Members have highlighted some areas that are not included. I would love to have included every part of Northern Ireland, but £20 million is £20 million, and we therefore have to have criteria and a methodology for the scheme. Due to population size and level of disadvantage, however, I assure Members who represent Belfast and Londonderry that they will remain the most significant beneficiaries of the RAISE programme.”
“I may give way when I make some progress. <BR /> <BR />In the current extremely challenging financial climate, as Mr Sheehan rightly recognised, I am delighted to have secured £20 million of additional investment for communities in Northern Ireland through the Shared Island Fund. Much has been made of the selection methodology for the programme. As I have said, the approach that my Department took was data-led. It is robust and was objectively designed and delivered. <BR /> <BR />There were three key elements to the methodology. First, the aim is to have a regional programme and therefore invest in communities right across Northern Ireland.”
“The Member excluded to mention that some Members used the publication of the list to exploit a particular approach that they take to education. I have heard it today, with a particular focus on grammar schools. Publishing it certainly gave some Members an opportunity to exploit the list to make a particular point. I have addressed the issue of the publication of the list. I have said today that no school has received funding. Not one school has received any funding. Ms Hunter referred to taking money off the poor to give to the wealthy, but that is wrong. Mr Carroll referenced schools that had received funding in my constituency, but that is also wrong. They will not correct the record, I am sure, but facts are not debatable. Members are entitled to their opinion, but the facts speak for themselves.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee Chairman wanted to make an intervention.”
“Fact three: no funding has yet been allocated to any school or community partner through RAISE. Any commentary that schools have got funding — I have heard it from some Members in the Chamber today — is wrong. Moreover, any commentary that schools will be receiving funding is completely inaccurate and premature. <BR /> <BR />Fact four: a period of co-design is under way in advance of any funding decisions. Locality reference groups will be established in each of the RAISE areas. Each group will listen, discuss, reflect and reach consensus on a strategic plan for the area. Ultimately, my Department will fund local plans that identify the need for investment, that develop evidence-based interventions, that design a collaborative approach to delivery and that clearly measure impact.”
“It is not more of the same or simply meant to replicate the £80 million a year directed at schools to tackle socio-economic disadvantage. Rather, the programme was explicitly designed to take a place-based approach to education, the need for which was highlighted by the 'A Fair Start' report panel. <BR /> <BR />Fact two: the criteria to select the RAISE localities were data-informed, with all areas having to meet a threshold of need, evidenced by factors such as free school meal entitlement, educational outcomes and special educational needs.”
“The RAISE programme is designed to use wide-ranging measures of socio-economic disadvantage to identify eligible areas and then pinpoint investment using educational attainment data. <BR /> <BR />Returning to RAISE itself, let us focus on the facts, because, after all, facts are far more stubborn than I can be. <BR /> <BR />Fact one: RAISE is a community-informed education programme, not a school-based programme. It therefore targets areas, not schools. It aims to promote a whole-community approach to education through place-based partnerships. It will fund interventions to improve educational outcomes for children and young people living in areas of disadvantage through joint working across communities, schools, government and the community and voluntary sector.”
“Are interventions not needed to tackle directly poor educational attainment? <BR /> <BR />I remind the House too that free school meal entitlement is simply a proxy for socio-economic disadvantage, and, like all proxy measures, as every Member who has spoken about free school meals has said, it is not perfect. Socio-economic disadvantage is a complex, multifaceted concept. Free school meal entitlement is tied to only one domain, which is household income. It is based on benefit claims, so children from families that narrowly miss the cut-off point for receiving benefits — the working poor — may experience similar or greater levels of deprivation than some children who are receiving free school meals. In addition, many eligible families do not apply for them and therefore may be missing from the estimates.”
“In recent weeks, I have reminded schools that there is a statutory requirement that they provide such information at Key Stages 1, 2 and 3. To be clear, that is not my requirement but a requirement set out in law, potentially enforceable by the courts. We do have GCSE and A-level results to enable us to analyse educational performance. Should we not use this data to target the areas with the lowest outcomes? Is this not entirely objective and sensible? Higher levels of qualification are strongly associated with better prospects in the labour market and in lifetime earnings. Individuals achieving five or more good GCSEs, including English and maths, as their highest qualification are estimated to have lifetime productivity gains worth around £100,000 on average compared with those of lower or no qualifications.”
“It is not alone in that conclusion. In a major international study, the programme for international student assessment (PISA) tells a similar story, concluding that the gap in achievement between pupils from the most advantaged backgrounds in Northern Ireland and those from less socio-economic advantaged homes was significantly smaller than the average across OECD countries. <BR /> <BR />In this context, therefore, is not the best assessment of educational underachievement found by looking at actual evidence of educational underachievement? Ideally, we would look at this across assessment at Key Stages 1, 2 and 3 as well as GCSE. Unfortunately, in recent years, we only have data at GCSE level. Members know the reason why.”
“The evidence across the world, of course, shows a close link between social disadvantage and low educational achievement. That is why significant funding is already targeted by my Department to tackle social disadvantage. <BR /> <BR />The independent review of education, based on a thorough review of the evidence, was very clear. Large numbers of schools with a high level of disadvantage in Northern Ireland are performing well above expectations in GCSE and A-level outcomes. It concluded:”
“That seems appropriate to the premise of the motion. Prejudice is, of course, a great timesaver. You can form opinions without having to get to the facts. I am happy to debate the constraining opinions, although I find it unproductive to debate facts. <BR /> <BR />The House must ask itself this: should the RAISE programme simply and exactly replicate the £80 million of annual funding already allocated to tackle social disadvantage in schools through the common funding scheme and other programmes or should it seek to support communities across Northern Ireland, ensuring a regional spread and directly targeting children living in areas where educational outcomes are lowest? The motion suggests that socio-economic background is the biggest predictor of educational underachievement.”
“Thank you. In any other forum at any other time, I would have thought it uncontentious to say that the best way to tackle educational underachievement is to tackle educational underachievement. Not so in this House, it seems. Instead, there is much focus on hyperbole and unfounded assertions. When we have objective educational data, I do not really understand why that is the case. The United States congressman Daniel Patrick Moynihan once reflected:”
“My colleague outlined that it is also an important factor, which is reflected in the criteria. However, it is not, as Mr Sheehan said, the best predictor of educational attainment and underachievement. <BR /> <BR />In 2022, a study by Dr Erin Early, Professor Miller, Dr Dunne and Elizabeth Nelson Gorman was published, and it is available to Members. Yes, the study substantiated the view that free school meals was an important factor, but it found that parental qualifications, particularly having a mother or father with no qualifications, were a greater predictor of attainment. Free school meals is not the best predictor, and I will elaborate on that in my response. Other factors relate to educational underachievement and to making sure that we get attainment.”
“I appreciate the Member's giving way. Normally, I respond at the end of a debate, but a lot of points are being raised, and I wanted to pick up on one of them. The Member mentioned social deprivation. He is absolutely right, as was the proposer of the motion and those who seek to amend it, about the importance of social deprivation.”
“I believe that the majority of people in Northern Ireland and the majority of colleagues here, in the Chamber, are in agreement that we must do everything that we can to protect young people from the harmful effects of vaping. <BR /> <BR />In closing, I echo some of the key public health messaging on the issue: vaping is not for children or young people; vaping is not harmless; the best thing that you can do for your health is to be smoke-free and vape-free. That is messaging that we must aim to work together to support and reinforce, collectively, if we are to protect the health of our children and our young people. <BR /> <BR />Thank you, again, to Sinn Féin for tabling the motion and to all colleagues in the Assembly who spoke to it.”
“I am aware that there was a significant amount of work by officials in the Department of Health to secure a legislative consent motion in respect of Northern Ireland's inclusion in the 2024 Tobacco and Vapes Bill. However, the Bill fell on the dissolution of Parliament, following the calling of the general election earlier this year. The King's Speech outlined the need for a new Bill on the matter to introduce progressive smoking bans. My officials will continue to work with the Department of Health and PHA colleagues, as they progress work to stop a new generation from becoming addicted to nicotine or other substances.”
“Similar measures are already in place in relation to tobacco products.”
“In October 2023 — last year — the UK Government announced their intention to create a smoke-free generation in England by stopping children born on or after 1 January 2009 ever legally being sold cigarettes. The key proposals in relation to e-cigarettes, which are more commonly known as "vapes", included restricting flavours, plain packaging and bans on point-of-sale displays.”
“They are on the front line, seeing, at first hand, the detrimental impact that vaping has in our schools, but they cannot tackle the issue alone. It is essential that we provide them with the support and resources that they need to raise awareness and inform our children effectively. We need a comprehensive and collective approach to addressing vaping in schools. As set out, it is important that we educate our young people on the risks of vaping and equip them to make good choices, safeguard our young people and improve their emotional health and well-being and have clear policies and procedures in place to promote positive behaviours in our schools. <BR /> <BR />We also need to consider the wider context.”
“<BR /> <BR />First and foremost, we must acknowledge the undeniable evidence that vaping poses a serious risk to a child's health. What might be marketed as a safer alternative is, in reality, introducing harmful chemicals into young bodies that are still developing. We are witnessing the impact of the trend unfolding in our classrooms, hallways and the school grounds, where more and more children are being drawn into this harmful behaviour. It is not only detrimental to their physical well-being; it distracts them from their studies and affects their concentration, attendance, participation in school life and, ultimately, impacts on their educational outcomes. <BR /> <BR />Teachers and school staff play a critical role in this effort.”
“However, it is important that we always give young people the opportunity to learn from mistakes and then to develop as individuals. The Department's guidance, 'Pastoral Care in Schools: Promoting Positive Behaviour', sets out how a school should develop a discipline and positive behaviour policy using a whole-school approach, including consultation with pupils and parents. <BR /> <BR />I turn now to focus on the particulars of the motion. The alarming rise of vaping amongst children and young people is a concern that we all share. It is an issue that goes beyond the school gates, reflects wider societal issues that education cannot resolve on its own and impacts on the health and educational outcomes of our young people. It is therefore a matter that requires a collective effort.”
“As a Department, we will continue to address those issues as part of the statutory curriculum. <BR /> <BR />We also have a duty to safeguard our pupils from harm. A school's safeguarding and child protection policy should link to its drug policy and include the requirement to notify the police in relation to an incident relating to illegal substances. The Department's Safer Schools Northern Ireland app provides guidance and support for teachers, pupils, parents and carers on a range of safeguarding issues, including vaping. <BR /> <BR />We also need to promote positive behaviour in our schools, so there is a statutory duty on schools to have relevant policies that set out the behaviour requirements of pupils. Most schools will set out the sanctions that they would impose regarding vaping in school through their behaviour policy.”
“As part of the curriculum, pupils at primary level are taught about the importance of making good choices and being aware of the effects of drugs and alcohol on their health and the health of others. At post-primary level, pupils explore the concept of health as the development of a whole person, and they investigate the effects on the body of legal and illegal substances and the risks and consequences of their misuse. Schools also have the flexibility to work directly with external organisations, such as the PHA and the PSNI, to provide learning opportunities in the delivery of those important aspects of the curriculum. Furthermore, all schools are required to have a drugs policy in place. The Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment (CCEA) has published drugs guidance for schools in Northern Ireland.”
“Therefore, my Department will work closely with the Department of Health, the Public Health Agency and, if necessary, the Department of Justice and the PSNI, following appropriate guidance and regulations. <BR /> <BR />The Public Health Agency has worked with key partners to produce up-to-date resources to raise awareness and support discussion with young people on vaping. That included writing to schools in March of this year to provide factual information and advice to inform young people, teachers, parents, carers and others working with young people about vaping, the law and the associated risks. <BR /> <BR />It is important that we first educate our children and young people on the risks of such activity and equip them to make positive choices.”
“As of 2022, more than a fifth of 11-to-16 year-olds in Northern Ireland reported having used an e-cigarette; nearly a quarter of year 12 children reported that they currently vaped; and the proportion of 11-to-16 year-olds who regularly vaped had doubled from 2019 to 2022. Young people often explain their reasons for vaping as peer pressure; social image; the perceived lower health risks of vapes compared with cigarettes; to support their mental health and reduce stress levels; and to address low self-esteem. Those are some of the misplaced reasons why young people have been vaping. <BR /> <BR />We need to prevent young people from starting to vape in the first place. It is an important matter of public health, and, in certain circumstances, it can be a criminal justice issue.”
“It is now proving to be a gateway and is drawing more people into taking a harmful substance. We need to be careful about speaking of vaping as a positive substitute, given the evidence that we have of its impact. There are challenges in seeking to restrict the use of vapes, addressing challenging behaviours and educating young people about the harmful risks of vaping. As I said, for many young people, vaping acts as a gateway to using dangerous substances, so we need to ensure that our schools are smoke-free and vape-free. <BR /> <BR />There is no doubt about the growing challenge.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I thank the Members who tabled the motion and everyone who took part in the debate. Information has been given that I want to take away and have my officials look into, because we need to tackle vaping collectively. <BR /> <BR />I visit many schools and engage with many school leaders and teachers. It is clear that the issue is of significant concern in our schools. Kellie Armstrong outlined from her experience as a school governor how challenging it is, and she spoke about the marketing of vaping products that she sees in her locality. There has been a rise in the popularity of vaping among children and young people. Members rightly made the point that, at one point, vaping was talked about as a substitute for smoking cigarettes and a way to get people off them.”
“That is certainly something that I will follow up on with my Department. There will be no resistance on my part to making sure that my officials engage in that area. The EA sensory service engages with Auditory Verbal UK to consider what improvements can be made to services in that area. That is an area of work that we are continuing to look at. Mr Mathison said that the qualification to become a teacher of the deaf is not available in Northern Ireland. Although he is right, the course is available as a distance learning course, but I take the Member's point about having a Northern Ireland course. <BR /> <BR />I thank Members for speaking on this issue. It is one that, rightly, we need to give attention to. We will continue to pursue these issues in due course.”
“<BR /> <BR />Members may be aware that the National Deaf Children's Society has recently commissioned independent research to review the support for deaf children and young people in Northern Ireland. I look forward to receiving that report in the coming months. I have no doubt that it will be helpful in informing how we can improve educational support for deaf children. <BR /> <BR />Once again, I thank Members for highlighting the needs of deaf children. I trust that it is now clear that every deaf child and their family has access to a qualified teacher of deaf children and young people, and other specialist support staff, as early as possible. <BR /> <BR />I will touch on a couple of issues that Members highlighted. Kellie Armstrong spoke of the need to work with the Department of Health on adult learning disability services.”
“Where a classroom assistant is required to support a deaf child using sign language, the sensory service advises that those assistants should have at least level 3 in British sign language. Whilst I am proud to speak today about the excellent support that we have for deaf children in Northern Ireland, there is always room for improvement. One of the areas for focus that was identified through the end-to-end review of special educational needs is on ensuring the sustainability of the sensory service, which will require workforce planning to address the ageing profile of teachers of deaf children and young people and the consideration of the need for those specialist teaching assistants.”
“That is an essential aspect of the service. It ensures a child-centred approach, which I am sure that Members will agree is of utmost importance. <BR /> <BR />I note the reference to specialist support professionals. It is essential that our trained professionals remain highly skilled throughout their career so that they can provide the best support possible to our children. The sensory service provides professional development for teachers of deaf children and young people so that they can enhance outcomes for deaf children and young people. <BR /> <BR />In line with inclusive practices, around 77% of school-age deaf children are educated in mainstream schools. I emphasise the importance of the need for specialist staff, as mentioned in the motion.”
“Service staff use their professional judgement to apply flexibility, depending on the needs of the child. Sensory service staff work in partnership with parents to support children and families, focusing on the child's development in language, communication, literacy and mathematics, as well as social and emotional development and fostering independence. They also provide information and advice to education settings on the implications of deafness and, of course, strategies to promote access to the curriculum and inclusion, including bespoke training for staff. The specialist support that we are discussing today is carried out by specialist staff in schools and by sensory service staff, who deliver individually tailored intensive supports and outreach for deaf children throughout Northern Ireland from birth and throughout their education.”
“<BR /> <BR />The commencement of support is, of course, family led, so achieving the target time frame may be impacted by family readiness to engage with support. That having been said, contact with the service is always maintained throughout the process. The support needs of young deaf children are assessed using the NatSIP early years eligibility framework and information from health service audiology and ear, nose and throat services. The views and needs of parents and carers are all considered. <BR /> <BR />That framework provides the service with a nationally used guide for levels of support and intervention, ranging from annual intervention right up to several interventions per week, depending on the individual needs of the child.”
“The newborn hearing screening programme in the health and social care trusts refers babies to the service, which aims to respond within two days, as recommended in the National Sensory Impairment Partnership (NatSIP) quality standards for sensory services. That partnership, working with health professionals, ensures that families have access to that support at the very earliest opportunity. From referral to first contact, for deaf or hard-of-hearing babies, the service works to impressive deadlines: within two days for a preschool child and five days for school-age children. The target time frame for the first visit from a teacher of deaf children and young people is four weeks, which ensures access to that very early intervention.”
“<BR /> <BR />I can also confirm that every deaf child has access to an education audiologist, who is uniquely qualified and skilled to improve access to learning for deaf children through their acoustic evaluations and advice on acoustic enhancements of the school environment. The sensory service works in partnership with parents of deaf children and young people to help them to support their child's development. The service provides support to deaf children and their families from the point of identification in the home and later on in the classroom. <BR /> <BR />The motion calls for early access. I can inform the House that teachers of deaf children and young people work with newborn babies and their families.”
“I am pleased to say that Northern Ireland's peripatetic teachers of deaf children and young people have the smallest caseloads in the four nations. I know that there are still challenges in respect of that issue, but there are challenges across the UK. Whilst, in Northern Ireland, we want to do more, and it is not of much comfort to those who want us to do more, we are in a better position than other parts of the UK in respect of the issue. In Northern Ireland, teachers of deaf children and young people have a caseload of around 59. In comparison, in Scotland, the figure is 118; in Wales, it is 230; and, in England, it is 332.”
“<BR /> <BR />I agree with the motion that every deaf child and their family should have access to a qualified teacher of deaf children and young people as early as possible. I am pleased to confirm that that is already the case in Northern Ireland. Indeed, I agree that, were there to be a lack of specialist teachers of deaf children and young people, it would have a negative impact on deaf children and their families. It is some comfort that every child does have access that is equal to or better than nationally used standards throughout the United Kingdom. <BR /> <BR />The Consortium for Research into Deaf Education Northern Ireland report 2023 — the CRIDE report — provides theoretical average caseloads.”