Nick Mathison
Strangford · Alliance Party · Northern Ireland
“That second part is important. In the scrutiny of the Minister's Bill on school uniforms, we got a little tied up over how we could build in provisions on PE, but, when we got to work on this Bill, we found that there is a simple formulation that will ensure that participation in sport and PE, which, we should remember, is a statutory par…”
“<BR /> <BR />On the basis of that feedback and the other evidence that we received, two draft approaches to developing the Bill were considered. The first was to create a separate, stand-alone Bill with a stand-alone right for pupils to be afforded the choice to wear trousers and to set that out in law.”
“Many schools do that really well, but others, regrettably, do not. To me, only legislation will guarantee the behaviour change that we need. It is not good enough for a Minister to say to young people, "But I give you permission to go and campaign. You run the campaign. Look at Rhea and Astrid: didn't they do so well?".”
“I will name a few: the school uniform must be affordable, so schools have no autonomy on that; and schools must consult with parents when they are changing their policy, so they have no autonomy on that. I could go through every one of the guidelines.”
“depending on the activity. That was to ensure that the need for appropriate clothing for sporting activities was reflected. <BR /> <BR />Ultimately, it is a permissive Bill. It is simply focused on creating a universal right to have the choice to wear trousers and enshrining that in the guidance.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I will not speak for long, and I do not plan to rehearse everything that has been said. However, I begin by doing something that I overlooked when I spoke at the beginning: thanking the Deputy Chair of the Committee who first proposed the Bill.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,029 lines we hold for Nick Mathison, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 21.
“Young people will thank us if we can get this one thing done in the Assembly today and in the months ahead as we get the Bill through to Final Stage.”
“Rather, schools will be told, "These are things that you must do". It does not matter if they do not like it; they do not have autonomy in all things, and that is the purpose of legislation. It is a question of where you draw those lines and where it is appropriate to give schools autonomy — in some cases it is — and where it is not. Young people told us clearly that this is a fundamental issue for them. They expected that their legislators would simply listen to them and deliver. We failed to do that, and we have to set that right. <BR /> <BR />I thank everybody who spoke in the debate and everybody who supported the work on this Committee Bill. I hope to see it pass, and I thoroughly recommend it to the House.”
“I will name a few: the school uniform must be affordable, so schools have no autonomy on that; and schools must consult with parents when they are changing their policy, so they have no autonomy on that. I could go through every one of the guidelines. The Minister's Bill puts in place things that schools must do, so a line has been drawn on issues in which schools should not have autonomy. We accept that when we look at minimum content in the curriculum: we say that schools should not have autonomy. Certain content is required at a minimum, which schools must deliver, regardless of whether they like it. We can also look at how we monitor assessment. The Minister is bringing through changes that will mean that it is not acceptable for a school to say, "We're not going to assess children or monitor their progress".”
“I appreciate that the DUP is not going to divide the House, because it is important that the Bill goes through and has the opportunity to be scrutinised further at the ad hoc committee stage. I hope that it progresses to law. However, the position of the Minister and the DUP, which Julie reflected in her comments, is that there should be a focus on school autonomy — that that should be a core principle. I cannot put that argument together, because, if we look at the Minister's School Uniforms Bill, we see that it requires schools to do a lot of things. It puts in place some things that schools are mandated to do. It puts in place statutory guidance.”
“That is the question. Young people, particularly girls, are telling us what they need on this issue. If we have learned anything from the experience of the School Uniforms (Guidelines and Allowances) Bill, it is that, when we fail to listen to young people, they will, perhaps, decide that they do not need to listen to us. We need to take seriously their concerns. These are not radical proposals; that is clear. <BR /> <BR />I do not plan to go through every Member's contribution in the debate, because the theme of most of them was the same, namely that it is hard to understand why we are having to debate this in 2026. However, I want to pick up on one particular thing. I tried to intervene when Julie Middleton was speaking.”
“We should be listening when we have a young person saying that it would be "worrying" if we did not take this forward. <BR /> <BR />Cara Hunter and then Claire Sugden raised issues around period dignity. We heard from the Menstruation Matters charity, which made a comment that sums up the concerns around why this is a good thing to do from the perspective of period dignity alone. It said:”
“A member of the Children's Law Centre's youth panel put it really well. They said:”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I will not speak for long, and I do not plan to rehearse everything that has been said. However, I begin by doing something that I overlooked when I spoke at the beginning: thanking the Deputy Chair of the Committee who first proposed the Bill. It is important to note that it was the Deputy Chair who started the conversation. We appreciate that. <BR /> <BR />We have talked a lot about the different views and about whether this is a good idea or not such a good idea. It is important to reflect, very quickly, some of the comments that we received from stakeholders who contributed to our Committee evidence. That will remind Members that this is not about what we think or our opinions; it is about what the people who matter think — those who have to wear the uniforms every day.”
“That is the simple choice that the Bill provides: do we care more about schools preserving their traditional values and the image of their school that they want to project, or do we want to deliver simple equality and dignity for all pupils? That is a straightforward question that, I hope, every Member in the House can answer sensibly today by supporting the passage of the Bill. <BR /> <BR />I sincerely hope that the Bill, with its simple and straightforward provisions, can make its passage through the Assembly and receive support today. Young people have made their views crystal clear to us as legislators that this should have been delivered already, so let us actually listen to them this time and make this small, simple, progressive change for our children and young people a reality.”
“Many schools do that really well, but others, regrettably, do not. To me, only legislation will guarantee the behaviour change that we need. It is not good enough for a Minister to say to young people, "But I give you permission to go and campaign. You run the campaign. Look at Rhea and Astrid: didn't they do so well?". He could give them that right tomorrow but is simply choosing not to. <BR /> <BR />I do not accept the argument that there is some sort of sanctity around the independent right of schools to set their own uniform policy with no central direction being required. That just does not cut it for me. The right to afford all pupils a simple choice to deliver comfort, equality and dignity is one that I would far rather deliver than making sure that the traditional values of a particular school are preserved.”
“<BR /> <BR />The explanatory and financial memorandum that comes with the Bill includes part of the Minister's correspondence to the Committee, and, based on that, it appears that he does not have any particular objection to girls having the choice; rather, he seems to think that, by requiring schools to consult on uniform policies, which his Bill required, young people's views will somehow naturally be adopted by those schools. That quite clearly did not happen with the consultation on the Minister's own Bill: when young people were asked, their views were ignored. Unfortunately — I say this with regret — I have no confidence that pupils will be unanimously heard at school level either. Many schools offer really sensible, flexible uniform policies, and I want to put that on the record.”
“I thank the Member for the intervention. Yes, it is disappointing that the Minister is not here today. I will be fair to him: he was clear that he was not going to do it. That was his position from the outset. However, if he had been prepared to do that, it would not have taken up Committee time, Bill Office time or Legal Services time, and it would not have incurred the costs associated with drafting a Bill. I say all that in the context that I believe that it was still the right thing to do, but, for some reason, there seems to be an ideological commitment to the preservation of the independence of schools, and the Minister chose not to do that.”
“He could, should he choose to do so, change the guidelines and have them in place before we break for summer recess.”
“<BR /> <BR />A whole range of other evidence was heard on comfort more widely: warmth in the winter, being able to engage in active travel to and from school and making it easier to participate in a play-based curriculum or outdoor learning at primary level. We heard about all those things in detail. I do not feel as though I need to go into any more detail than that. It is 2026, and I do not accept that this proposal is controversial. <BR /> <BR />That is why there is some frustration around the issue. As I mentioned, I admit that, when the discussions about a Committee Bill started, I was a little sceptical, not only because of timing issues but because my strong sense was that the Minister was the person who was accountable. He could resolve this with the stroke of a pen.”
“Surely, if we could take action to address even that, it would be a reason to take forward the Bill's provisions. <BR /> <BR />We heard about some of the sensory issues that children experience. We heard about how some primary-school children in particular struggle to learn comfortably when in a restrictive skirt or forced to wear tights. In my view, those children should not have to go and seek special accommodations to be allowed to wear something different as their uniform, although many schools are very flexible when they do. Affording the choice that the Bill introduces avoids the scenario where anyone has to become a special case and make a pitch to a board of governors on why there should be flexibility. The Bill creates an inclusive environment from which everybody will benefit.”
“The approach is outdated and speaks more to the interests of preserving tradition or gender stereotypes than it does to delivering a modern, progressive approach to educating our children. <BR /> <BR />When it comes to participating in PE, the evidence that we heard was clear: girls almost unanimously advised the Committee that they would be far happier and far more comfortable taking part in sport if they had the option to wear shorts, leggings or tracksuit bottoms. However, in many schools, that option was still not provided to them. <BR /> <BR />We heard evidence on period dignity for girls. So many young people talked about feeling anxious and uncomfortable having to wear a skirt when they were on their period, with some even choosing not to attend school on occasions for that reason.”
“The reasons why the change is required are so obvious to most people — certainly, to most people who gave evidence to the Committee — that they almost do not need to be set out. However, as some people, including the Minister, do not think that the change is necessary, I will cover some of them, really for the sake of completeness. <BR /> <BR />The first point is that women can choose to wear trousers in any other aspect of life, including working life. Therefore, I see no reason why we should put additional restrictions on the choice afforded to our young people. We would not place those restrictions in workplaces or, I would add, on the teachers who teach in the schools that those children and young people attend.”
“Alternatively, and I think that the Committee would have been open to this, he could even have given us assurances on the record that he would put in place statutory guidance addressing the concerns that young people were raising. However, he chose not to do so. I note that he is not in the Chamber to respond. I am not quite clear in my mind as to why he is not here. The Bill interacts directly with legislation that he introduced and impacts directly on the functions of his Department. Perhaps the Minister will issue a written ministerial statement to explain that to me. <BR /> <BR />Understandably, young people were baffled by and, indeed, angry at that decision and approach. It was principally for that reason that the Committee took this Bill forward.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Minister's School Uniforms (Guidelines and Allowances) Act — it was a Bill when the Committee looked at it — is one of the clearest examples that I can think of where young people took their role in engaging with legislation very seriously but ultimately felt that the Minister and Department had effectively disregarded their views in their entirety. <BR /> <BR />I set out the processes for Committee amendments in my remarks as Chair and will not repeat them. I know that I cannot speak to them in detail in this context. However, I will note — this is not in relation to the amendments that we tabled — that, at any time during the amending stages, the Minister could have brought forward his own amendment that took account of the clear evidence that we were hearing from young people.”
“I am not suggesting — this is rehearsed in the Education Committee quite regularly — that engagement with young people means that we take their views and, without scrutiny, apply them to everything that we are doing. As legislators, we are always balancing competing views, voices and priorities. However, I really feel that there is a risk of losing young people's confidence in our political processes if they consistently feel ignored and cannot hear their voices or views reflected in any of the outworkings of the decisions that we take in this place.”
“MLAs talk an awful lot about listening to young people, particularly in the Education Committee, and that is undoubtedly a good thing and the right thing for legislators to do. However, the complaint that we often hear from the young people whom we propose to engage with is that we may engage, but they are not convinced that we really listen. They are not convinced that their views are factored into the policies and legislative decisions that we take in tangible ways.”
“That was a consistent theme in the evidence during the ministerial Bill and the Committee Bill. Law is most effective when it is clear, accessible and simple and when the public can clearly understand what the legislation does and translates to in their lived experience. The Bill does all those things. It sets it out clearly to all schools that every pupil can choose to wear trousers or equivalent for sports, should they wish. I commend the principles of the Bill to the House. <BR /> <BR />I will now make some remarks as an Alliance MLA. I will try not to cover any of the technical information that we have gone through and talk more about the principles of the Bill.”
“The Committee considered the matter and discussed it in detail. The Committee took legal advice and ultimately decided against an exemption on the basis that the Bill offers a choice to pupils, rather than restricting them or requiring them to act in a particular way. It is a permissive Bill rather than a restrictive one. <BR /> <BR />I will conclude my remarks as the Chair of the Committee, by saying that it is an important function of law and for legislators, when they make law, to reflect the values and norms of the society that we live in. Over the time since many school uniforms were designed, the societal norms have changed, and most people who gave evidence to the Committee were incredulous about the inflexibility of some schools about uniforms.”
“In particular, it is appropriate for me to thank Barbara Love, Niamh Devlin and Maeve Corrigan for working together with the Committee Clerk to define the work and complete it in time to get us to the point where the Bill will now, hopefully, receive the endorsement of the House to move to an Ad Hoc Committee Stage, with the strong hope that the Bill will complete its passage in this mandate. <BR /> <BR />The Committee considered whether there would be a reasonable excuse for exemption from the central tenet of the Bill to be considered. We considered the evidence received from independent schools, particularly the Free Presbyterian Education Board of Presbytery, which had requested an exemption based on its school ethos, which privileges distinctions in dress between boys and girls, males and females.”
“However, it is a great credit to all the officials involved that they have moved the Committee rapidly and thoroughly through all the required steps to bring us to this point, which is a big achievement. The officials require significant credit for that. <BR /> <BR />We received advice from the Bill Office on the legislative procedure to deliver the Committee's policy intent. We received research advice from the Research and Information Service (RaISe) on comparative best practice, advice from the Assembly's Legal Services and iterative engagement with the drafter as the Bill progressed, and that was all delivered promptly and, in many instances, ahead of time.”
“There were initial apprehensions about coordinating and delivering the project on time, but the Bill team's work was impressive. I will be honest: some of the initial apprehensions came from me. As the Chair of the Committee, I was concerned about embarking on a process that would get timed out. I was concerned that we might not complete the task that we had started. I was conscious of the frustrations expressed after the outcome of the previous Bill, where there was a sense among the public, the pupils who had given us evidence and the Committee that the Bill had not delivered in the way that it had the potential to. I was cautious about starting a process that we could not complete, which would raise expectations.”
“I anticipate that there is the possibility that the Ad Hoc Committee may need to look at the commencement. When we were scrutinising the Minister's Bill, we found that there were a range of issues around reasonable time frames for schools and when they needed to publish prospectuses. The current commencement date in the Bill is set with the intention of the change being delivered for the next academic year, starting in September 2027. However, if the Ad Hoc Committee finds that another commencement date will deliver the aim in a way that is more manageable for schools, that is for it to discuss. We were clear as a Committee that we saw no reason for the commencement to be delayed until any academic year beyond September 2027. <BR /> <BR />I will make full disclosure about the Committee Bill process.”
“depending on the activity. That was to ensure that the need for appropriate clothing for sporting activities was reflected. <BR /> <BR />Ultimately, it is a permissive Bill. It is simply focused on creating a universal right to have the choice to wear trousers and enshrining that in the guidance. It seeks to give absolute clarity to every school in this jurisdiction that all pupils can, should they choose to, wear trousers as part of the school uniform and that no permission to do so needs to be sought. <BR /> <BR />Once enacted, the Committee is confident that the legislation will dovetail with the Department's guidelines. It will require them to be amended, and it will trigger the reissue and publication of the revised guidelines in time for commencement on 1 August 2027, which is detailed in the Bill.”
“That second part is important. In the scrutiny of the Minister's Bill on school uniforms, we got a little tied up over how we could build in provisions on PE, but, when we got to work on this Bill, we found that there is a simple formulation that will ensure that participation in sport and PE, which, we should remember, is a statutory part of the curriculum, is covered by the provisions. <BR /> <BR />We ultimately decided that it was not necessary to define "trousers", although we had an interesting legal briefing, during which there was some entertaining discussion about how we might do that. "Full-length, two-legged garments worn from the waist down" was floated, but we decided that that might obscure the intent. We therefore felt that a common-sense understanding of the meaning of "trousers" was probably more appropriate.”
“It goes on to require that uniform guidelines:”
“Clause 1 is the key provision in the Bill. It inserts into uniform guidelines the following statement:”
“<BR /> <BR />On the basis of that feedback and the other evidence that we received, two draft approaches to developing the Bill were considered. The first was to create a separate, stand-alone Bill with a stand-alone right for pupils to be afforded the choice to wear trousers and to set that out in law. The second proposal was to amend the existing School Uniforms (Guidelines and Allowances) Act (Northern Ireland) 2026 to, first, set out that right and then to require it to be included and reflected in the statutory guidelines that were already prepared by the Minister. The Committee went for the second option. We felt that the legislation brought forward by the Department was the most appropriate vehicle to deliver the policy intention. <BR /> <BR />The Bill that we are debating today has five clauses and no schedules.”
“The Committee felt that the Bill fitted into that equation neatly. <BR /> <BR />The Committee's Citizen Space survey ran from 12 December 2025 to 20 February 2026. We received a large number of responses, and, almost entirely, they comprehensively endorsed the Committee's proposal in the Bill. There was a total of 3,695 responses. On the central question of whether pupils should be afforded the right to choose whether to wear trousers — that is an important element: it is a choice, not a compulsion — as part of the school uniform, 98·21% of respondents indicated that they were in favour. On the question of whether any exemption from the proposal should be permitted, 91·85% said that no school in Northern Ireland should be left out of the provisions.”
“There was close to unanimous welcome for the proposed Bill because it is seen as helping to deliver equality and choice in a practical and pragmatic way. <BR /> <BR />From a legal and rights perspective, the Human Rights Commissioner advised the Committee that there was, in fact, a strong argument that it could be seen as unlawful sex discrimination not to allow girls the right to choose to wear trousers and that article 10 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women requires a state to:”
“<BR /> <BR />The process that we undertook drew significantly on the evidence that we heard during the Committee Stage of the School Uniforms (Guidelines and Allowances) Bill, but the Committee also put out a survey seeking views on the new proposal to give every pupil the right to wear trousers as part of their school uniform should they choose to do so. We held a range of oral evidence sessions as part of the Committee's preparation for the Bill that is before us. We engaged with the Youth Assembly, the Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People (NICCY), the Children's Commissioner's Youth Panel, the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission and the Northern Ireland Teachers' Council (NITC).”
“<BR /> <BR />Many Members will be aware of the powerful campaign that was run by two then primary-school pupils, Rhea and Astrid, who campaigned for the right to wear trousers and eventually secured that change to uniform policy at school level. However, the Committee formed a clear view that we should not place the burden of delivering such change on individual pupils, relying on them to run campaigns at school level, and that, particularly given the Department's legislation that had recently been passed, it was an issue for us, as legislators, to address. The Bill was floated as an idea and has now reached Second Stage.”
“<BR /> <BR />As the Committee began to discuss the issues, it was agreed that, as with a private Member's Bill (PMB), any attempt to legislate, if that was what we were going to do to address what we considered to be gaps in the Minister's Bill, would need to be narrow in focus to give us any reasonable prospect of delivering a Bill and doing so in this mandate. The many stakeholder responses that the Committee had heard conveyed a strong and consistent message on the choice for girls and, in fact, all pupils to wear trousers as part of their school uniform. That ended up being the area of narrow focus that the Committee decided to look at to try to enhance the Minister's School Uniforms (Guidelines and Allowances) Bill.”
“That is a really important phrase. On that basis, it was entirely right and appropriate that, in its evidence and deliberations, the Committee went beyond the issue of cost, as, in many ways, the Bill directed and required if we were to do our scrutiny properly. On cost and on comfort and practicality, the Committee agreed and tabled a range of amendments to address the issues raised in evidence at Committee Stage. One amendment attempted to address the issue of the choice to wear trousers, but, as we are aware — I will not speak to this in detail — a number of amendments were not selected for debate and the Committee was therefore left to reconsider its options for enhancing the Bill.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. It is a real privilege to move the Second Stage of the Bill. As far as I know, this is the first occasion on which the Education Committee has introduced a Bill, so it is gratifying to see it reach Second Stage. <BR /> <BR />The Committee's journey with the Bill began when it undertook Committee Stage scrutiny of the Minister's School Uniforms (Guidelines and Allowances) Bill last year. It is important to note at the outset that that Bill was not, as was suggested on many occasions, just about the cost of uniforms. It was undoubtedly concerned with cost to a great extent, but clause 2 of that Bill stated:”
“I have nothing to add to my original comments other than to respond to Mr Brooks. It was clear in our Committee discussions and in my remarks that I certainly do not view the date as a target and would hope that we could move through the process more quickly, but, given the particular concerns raised by the teaching profession, it is important to build in the time to hear that evidence. There is certainly no intention of foot-dragging on my part. Other than that, I covered everything in my opening remarks and am happy to conclude.”
“<BR /> <BR />The more controversial clause 3 proposes to sanction teachers who do not comply with inspections. We are aware of the concern that that has caused among the teaching profession, and it is important to scrutinise the clause properly to establish exactly what its effect would be, whether it could be amended and improved to the satisfaction of the teaching profession, or whether, if necessary, on the basis of its deliberations, the Committee might decide to table an amendment to remove it in its entirety. The proposed Committee Stage deadline gives us the time to do that work and do it thoroughly. <BR /> <BR />Undoubtedly, this is important legislation, and I hope that the proposed stage extension receives support so that the concerns that we have identified with the Bill can be given the attention required.”
“As I said, the Bill attracted significant debate at Second Stage due to concerns about clause 3. It is important to note again at this stage, however, that it is a three-clause Bill, with each clause doing very different and separate things. I put on record that I am particularly interested in clause 2, which proposes to deliver the long overdue reform to ensure that RE is inspected by the Education and Training Inspectorate in our schools. It is important that we have the appropriate time at Committee Stage to scrutinise that proposal. I have concerns that it does not go far enough, in that, as far as I can tell, it leaves on the statute book provisions allowing the Churches to retain rights of inspection, which I can see no good reason to continue at this point.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee is mindful, with all the legislation that it is dealing with at the moment, of the flow of legislation through the Assembly. It takes its scrutiny role seriously as well as its responsibility to optimise the opportunity to deliver legislation in the mandate, and we hope that the timeline established will allow the passage of the Bill before the Assembly dissolves. I anticipate a lot of interest and debate at Committee Stage, particularly on clause 3, as has been referenced. On balance, however, I believe that the Committee Stage extension to 9 December is reasonable and constitutes adequate time for consideration of all relevant factors in the Bill's new legislative proposals. <BR /> <BR />I will now make a brief comment as a Member.”
“Following the conclusion of that Citizen Space survey, the further stages anticipated in our Committee deliberations are the holding of oral evidence sessions on the substance of the Bill; Committee deliberation on any evidence received; engagement as required with departmental officials to answer any queries arising from those evidence sessions and members' considerations of the Bill; the development and consideration of potential Committee amendments; informal and formal clause-by-clause scrutiny and approval of the Bill; and consideration and approval of the final Committee report to the Assembly. The Committee has set out a timeline, including all those steps, with a view to permitting adequate time to complete each of those by the 9 December deadline, if not before.”
“It will engage with the Department and stakeholders to examine exactly what the impact of that clause as drafted will be. <BR /> <BR />So far, the Committee has launched a Citizen Space survey on the provisions of the Bill and invited all education stakeholders to submit written submissions on the proposal.”
“That is particularly in relation to the inclusion of the inspection of RE, which was not previously going to be in scope, and some changes to the proposals around the sanctioning of teachers since the criminal offence has been removed. We will come to that, I am sure. Clause 3 has raised significant commentary and concern and is likely to be a feature of the Committee's deliberations. We are mindful of the concerns that were raised at Second Stage about clause 3, which was linking the inspection process to teacher conduct and introducing a definition of "unacceptable professional conduct" when a teacher does not cooperate with an inspection. That could lead to disciplinary action, although the detail of that is not clear. That is something that the Committee will need to explore in more detail.”
“The Committee for Education decided its timeline for the Committee Stage of the Education Inspections Bill by attempting to strike a balance between the competing priorities of delivering legislation in a timely fashion and the crucial components of good scrutiny. Having considered all the relevant factors in the mix, the Committee agreed a motion to extend the Committee Stage until 9 December 2026. <BR /> <BR />The Committee took a pre-legislative briefing some time ago on the proposed legislation. The Bill has subsequently been to the Executive for consideration, and departmental officials have advised that certain aspects of the Bill have been changed since the original briefing and draft.”
“I thank the Member for his answer. The British Heart Foundation has been keen to ensure that that registration went ahead, so that will be welcome news. Are there any plans to share information on where those defibrillators are with all users of the Building so that they can be easily accessed in an emergency?”
“I beg to introduce the School Uniforms (Trousers) Bill [NIA 40/22-27], which is a Bill to permit all pupils to wear trousers as part of their school uniform.”
“You will be aware of the direct award contract that has been made to InnerDrive for teacher continuing professional development (CPD). Will the Minister outline the reason why it was felt that it was not worth going out to any other company to run a proper procurement process? It seems odd that only one company could be designated as being capable of providing CPD to our teachers in Northern Ireland.”