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 10 of 21.
“It may be that the amendment was not necessary, but, in the absence of that clarity, the Committee felt this to be an important aspect for inclusion in the Bill. It was very clear from the evidence that we heard, particularly from young people, that they felt, in some contexts, completely ignored in relation to school uniform policy in their school. They felt that it was just something that was imposed upon them and that their views were not relevant. Also, parents felt that they might sign their child up for a school at a given point in the year only to find that the uniform policy hid a whole range of costs that they had not been aware of or understood. It seems critical that both of those groups are required to be consulted by a school when it is drafting its policy. <BR /> <BR />I turn to amendment No 5.”
“The fact that that was not mandated in the Bill as drafted seems like a significant oversight. Members from the DUP did not take this position, and I am sure that they will address that, but there was a strong feeling among the Committee members from other parties that that needs to be corrected. It seemed clear that parents and pupils who are associated with the school should have to be consulted if the level of engagement with the school community on a school uniform policy is going to be meaningful and to ensure that a policy is fit for purpose for the school. <BR /> <BR />It may well be the case — I suspect that it is — that, if draft guidelines were before us now, those requirements might be provided, but we could not get those assurances from the Department.”
“Although not all parties agreed on all aspects of the discussions on that point — I am sure that Members will address that in their remarks — there was a feeling that, as the guidelines will actively dictate what schools actually have to do to reduce costs and what schools would find to be a new requirement, it would be appropriate for the Bill to prescribe the content of some of the key aspects of those guidelines. <BR /> <BR />Amendment Nos 2 and 3 sit together. If they are passed, they will stipulate that the guidelines "must" inform schools who is to be consulted on their uniform policy, although doing so would not limit who can be consulted, should schools choose to consult more widely. Following on from that, they will stipulate that the consultees "must" include parents and guardians and the pupils of the school.”
“I promise Members that I will not rehearse all the comments about the Committee Stage. I am sure that no one wants to hear those repeated, so I will move straight to speaking directly to the group 2 amendments. <BR /> <BR />With this group of amendments, we are really looking at the content of the guidelines — what they contain — and at whether we are satisfied that they will deliver on the Bill's intentions. Throughout the Committee Stage, there was much discussion on how many provisions of the Bill were framed in terms of what "may" be included in the guidelines rather than what "must" be included. That was a recurring theme in probably every Committee meeting on the issue.”
“<BR /> <BR />I commend the Committee's amendments to the House, because I believe that they add the appropriate level of enforcement and monitoring that is required to ensure, as far as is possible — notwithstanding the debate on which amendments were selected and which were not, and the fact that many of us would have liked to see other things on the Floor for debate — that the Bill that is effective and that it delivers. Thank you.”
“However, we cannot ignore the fact that, for whatever reason to do with their history, their tradition, the perceived demographic of the students that they seek to attract or whatever else it may be, there are outliers that do not seem to have an appetite to take seriously the issue of costs and of ensuring that their school is open to absolutely everybody regardless of economic background. Knowing that to be the case, and knowing that there are schools that will maintain such a position, it is important that there is accountability.”
“Where do we go from here? I hope that Members consider carefully how they vote on these amendments so that we can be assured that the Bill that comes out the other side of this process, through the group 1 amendments, delivers on enforcement and is effective. We will come to whether or not the content of the Bill and what it is going to do is appropriate. If we are serious about tackling costs, however — everybody has said today that they are — we have to be serious about monitoring the impact of the Bill and ensuring that it is enforced. <BR /> <BR />I will be clear on this for the record: the vast majority of schools are trying to do the right thing. They are there to serve their communities.”
“Committees across the Assembly are engaging in the scrutiny of Executive Bills, suggesting improvements and enhancements when the scrutiny stage kicks in. That is entirely appropriate. To suggest that we should leave the Bill alone because it is an Executive Bill does not reflect the reality of how this place operates.”
“It is about failing in a material respect, which means a serious breach, and the enforcement regime that flows from that should reflect its seriousness. That is my view on the amendments on enforceability. <BR /> <BR />I will pick up a couple of other points from the debate. The Minister particularly emphasised the Bill's status as an Executive Bill. Yes, of course it is: any Bill that comes through the Department has passed through the Executive. However, nobody here would say that that means that every member of the Executive has rubber-stamped it and said, "The Bill is the finished article, requires no attention or amendment and entirely delivers everything that we want it to". If that were the case, we would not have a Committee Stage; there would be no such thing.”
“If a school is failing in one or more material — "material" meaning substantial or significant — respects to comply with the guidelines that are there to bring costs down, why is that school in that space? If it has reached a place in which it still refuses to engage with the Department when the Department has highlighted its concerns and if the school is of that mindset, there may need to be a robust mechanism so that it is assured and clear that there will be a consequence for that action. The phrase "material respects" means that we are not talking about an inconsequential matter, where a school may not have used the right form of words to reflect the guidelines accurately or may not have been clear enough in one element of its uniform policy.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. I re-emphasise that it was clear from the Department's evidence to the Committee that officials did not envisage any scenario in which it would get anywhere near a courtroom. I hope that that would be the case: I hope that schools would have the good sense to comply with the guidelines. Although I do not like the "name and shame" element, its benefit is the sense that the school's name will be put into the public domain. It comes down to the phrase about failure:”
“<BR /> <BR />From the Department's evidence to the Committee on the enforcement of the guidelines, it seemed that officials really thought — they were at pains to emphasise this — that the guidelines would be so clear and robust that it was highly unlikely that any school would have the wriggle room to diverge from them. They did not see any scenario in which it was likely that the Department would be involved in directing a school. If that is the case, I am not sure where the concerns about the change to a "must" provision on publication come from. If the Minister is confident that the Bill will deliver a regime that will work for parents and deliver reduced costs and that schools will have to comply, the concerns that are being raised do not carry much weight.”
“I thank the Deputy Chair for his intervention. My memory is the same as his: in the Committee, we were given very clear assurances that the guidelines would be provided in draft form to the Committee. That would have been helpful. I was open to being reassured. As I said in my opening remarks, I never approached the process with the desire of messing with the Minister's Bill. I will be really clear: the issue is too important to get into that space. I have no desire to put prescriptive measures in the Bill just to score a point or be able to say that they were something that I did or that the Committee achieved. We did not see the guidelines, so we did not get the reassurance. To a large extent, that is why we are where we are with the process.”
“From my perspective, I will not change my position on that amendment. <BR /> <BR />The debate on amendment Nos 9, 10, 11 and 12 has been helpful. It reflected the discussion that we had in Committee, which had a fair degree of back and forth on what an appropriate balance to strike on enforcement should be. However, nothing that I heard in the debate convinced me that what the Committee introduced is anything other than necessary and appropriate. <BR /> <BR />We will come to this in the next group, but guidelines are only as good as what is in them. They are also only as good as the extent to which they can be meaningfully enforced. My sense from —.”
“I do not want to rehearse the comments that I made earlier on that in any great detail. I am not particularly speaking for the Committee here, but, from our discussions, this point is probably broadly reflective of what other Members discussed in Committee. My concern is that, if we left it to the Department to mark its own homework on accountability, there would be a risk that the provisions would be diluted. I appreciate that the Minister highlighted his concerns on the specific wording. I trust that, if there were something that caused a serious technical problem for the Department, it would certainly be within its capabilities to address it and tidy it up at Further Consideration Stage. In the Committee's discussions, we were clear that we want that reporting mechanism to be made clear in the Bill.”
“It should be clearly laid down, and I hope that Members take on board the Committee's considerations on that point. <BR /> <BR />I cannot see that the Department should have anything to fear from laying the guidelines in the Assembly as proposed in amendment No 4. It is another layer of ensuring that the guidelines are clearly out in the public domain. No doubt the guidelines will be published, and it would seem unusual to force a Division on an issue of that nature. <BR /> <BR />The Minister set it out clearly that he has a particular view on and concerns about amendment No 8. From the Committee's perspective, there was a clear acknowledgement that, other than the review happening "from time to time", there is no other accountability measure in the Bill.”
“I feel that amendment Nos 1 and 4 should really not cause anybody any undue concern. The idea that the Department would at least once every three years check in on the guidelines and look at them again to see whether they are effective seems to be fairly routine. It was the phrase "from time to time" being left in the Bill that caused Committee members concern. It was felt that there was a bit of a hands-off approach being taken: "From time to time, we might look at it, or we might not". If I say that I enjoy an activity "from time to time", that gives the sense that it happens once in a blue moon for me. That is how I read that, and we would want to look at it much more frequently than once in a blue moon or "from time to time".”
“Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. Although Peter Martin may have been disappointed that the tone of the debate was a bit more negative than he would have liked, it has been clear that everybody in the Chamber is on the same page on at least one issue, which is that we need to do something about the cost of school uniforms. The question in this group of amendments is whether the Bill will ensure that the monitoring and enforcement of the guidelines to deliver on that intended outcome will be effective. <BR /> <BR />A lot of the contributions that were made today when we discussed the content of those guidelines probably strayed substantially into group 2. We will get into that in more detail when we come to the next group of amendments. However, the issue before us is the monitoring and enforcement in group 1.”
“Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. That is noted. I will come directly to a question to the Minister on that point. <BR /> <BR />Do you not accept that, in an engagement with a school about a failure in a material respect to adhere to the guidelines, it is a different conversation if the school knows that the Department will direct it if it does not engage — if it chooses not to, there is still a chance that the school will be able to continue on the same course of action — and that the amendment creates a more robust power?”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. Just to —.”
“The "may" provision that was tabled as clause 7(1)(a) was simply to try to navigate the risk, which Mr Burrows alluded to, of getting embroiled in the minutiae of schools' disciplinary policies and interactions with individual pupils, which was why we struck that balance. Given that, does the Minister concede that the scenarios of a school failing to materially adhere to the guidelines — digging its heels in and refusing to comply with what the Department is asking — and an issue potentially arising with how a school's disciplinary policy is applied are different and may require different approaches?”
“I thank the Minister for giving way again. He has been very generous by giving way on numerous occasions. I want to clarify a couple of points on amendment Nos 9 and 10. The distinction that was made about the use of "must" in clause 7(1)(a) was drawn because, as a Committee, we felt that, if a school was, in a material respect, failing to adhere to the guidelines, which, we have heard clearly — everyone is agreed — should be principally about dealing with that issue of cost — that view has been highlighted — and failing in a material way to bring down the cost of school uniforms as it is legally required to do, and that, further to engagement with the Department, it continued on that course of action, it was entirely appropriate that the Department must direct it.”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. Will the Minister help us to understand why they have waited until 15 September, the day of the debate, to highlight those specific concerns, given that the Committee reported on the Bill at the beginning of July? There would have been ample opportunity at that stage. I appreciate that there was no Marshalled List at that stage, but surely, with the benefit of time on our side, that would have been the appropriate time to have those engagements.”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. I do not think that any Member would object were the Department to take the sensible approach of disaggregating primary and post-primary costs in any report that it brought to the Assembly. I do not think that the amendment precludes the Department from doing that. Is there an issue? You have referenced "mean costs" and "median costs". Some of our concern might be that the Department is in fact reluctant to do that data collection work to establish the costs and set benchmarks on how much a school uniform costs across Northern Ireland. The Committee's appetite was for us to get that baseline data, which would then be regularly reviewed.”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. Just before you move on to the amendments, Minister, I want to go back to the point about the process and the timelines and the fact that you are confident of the fact that, once the Bill passes all its stages, schools will be clear on their responsibilities. Do you have a view on what you will do with schools that have been outliers and continued to pursue having extremely expensive uniforms? We will almost certainly be in a scenario where Royal Assent will not have been granted when those guidelines are landing. What will you, as Minister, do to ensure that those schools will live up to the expectations that we all have in this place that they will do something about costs?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Does he agree that the Bill contains quite a lead-in process before the Department would be in the space of issuing a direction, that there is capacity to engage with the school manager on the issue and that one would have to ask a question if, despite that engagement, the school were to dig its heels in and still refuse to comply with the guidelines?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Apologies: I did not realise that you were bringing your remarks to a close. <BR /> <BR />You made a statement that the scope of the Bill is to bring down costs, but the Bill also refers to other issues, particularly comfort and practicality. I would like to hear why you feel that that the Bill is only about cost, despite its text also covering those other issues.”
“Thank you for giving way. In relation to the issue of publishing directions that are made, do you agree that that would deliver a more effective deterrent and that schools would be much more likely to roll the dice around whether to comply with the guidelines if they knew that there was a sanction that could impact on their reputation?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Does he agree that any attempt to dilute the amendments that the Committee has tabled on the enforceability of the directions and on openness and transparency around them will not inspire confidence in how serious the Department or the Minister is about ensuring that the guidelines are implemented?”
“It is not in any way about getting one up on any other party or winning but about making sure that parents win out of the process. If the Bill is not effective, or it is not as effective as it could be, the Assembly should have the opportunity to interrogate properly why that is the case and to hear how it will be corrected. <BR /> <BR />I am satisfied that my remarks as Chair set out a clear rationale for the other amendments in the group, but I place firmly on the record my views on the importance of amendment No 8, which I was pleased to propose at Committee Stage. I am also pleased that it received support from all members when we went through our clause-by-clause deliberations. I look forward to the rest of the debate on the amendments in the group.”
“<BR /> <BR />Without amendment No 8, I fear that, regardless of its impact on cost — positive or negative — once it gains Royal Assent, there is a real risk that the Bill will be seen as the final destination when it comes to intervention from the Department on the cost of uniforms. It is therefore vital that there be accountability regarding its effectiveness and what the Department will do if the legislation does not deliver as promised. <BR /> <BR />I wish to be clear. I have said this before, but it bears repeating: I sincerely hope that the legislation is effective, and I welcome the fact that it is being debated in the Assembly today. I will welcome its impact if that is the scenario in which we find ourselves, because if we are serious about doing our job, everybody here will want to see uniform costs be reduced for parents.”
“The Bill is light on definitive elements that schools will be required to adhere to in guidelines, while the provisions to restrict branded items or to introduce a cost cap remain either "may" provisions that are subject to amendment today or, in the case of a cap, an enabling provision that may or may not be used in the future, so I am clear that there is a need for accountability. It therefore seems entirely reasonable to me that, once a mandate, whoever holds the office of Minister of Education should report to the House on the legislation's impact on reducing school uniform costs; on any intention to implement a cost cap, and if not, why not; and on any plans that the Department has to carry out a further review of the guidelines.”
“We have not seen the draft guidelines. I assume that they have been drafted and are in place, but, for whatever reason, they have not been provided to us. We certainly do not have even a sense of what their content will be. I sincerely hope that the guidelines will provide a clear, enforceable framework that will require schools that still expect parents to pay excessive costs to get the situation under control. No Member wants to see £180 blazers in any school uniform policy. That price seems to be so disconnected from parents' lived financial realities as to make it hard for me to comprehend how it could be stood over.”
“Every Member of the Assembly will hear from their constituents about the impact of excessive school uniform costs on their family finances. At times, for some schools, those costs can be crippling and create huge stress and distress, particularly over the summer months. As the Bill is really fairly light on detail about what will be delivered as an outworking of the guidelines, we felt that it was vital that there was a mechanism to ensure accountability. To my mind, the Bill gives us no assurances of what the guidelines will specifically require schools to do.”
“Amendment No 8 is the requirement that whoever holds the office of Minister of Education in future years come to the Assembly every three years and report clearly on the impact of the Bill and what it has done to the costs of school uniforms across Northern Ireland and, specifically, to address whether the cost-cap power will be utilised; if it has, what has been the impact; and, if not, whether there is the intention to do so.”
“Nobody wants to name and shame schools, but nobody wants an enforcement mechanism that has no teeth and cannot be utilised to ensure that the guidelines are adhered to. On balance, there was debate backward and forward and differences in opinion, but we feel that that balance has been struck with the amendments. <BR /> <BR />That concludes my remarks on the group as Chair of the Committee. I hope that that contribution sets out clearly the rationale of the Committee in proposing the amendments. <BR /> <BR />With you permission, Mr Speaker, I will speak to one amendment in particular in the group in my capacity as an Alliance MLA, and that is amendment No 8. To my mind, it is fundamentally important in ensuring that the Bill is effective.”
“If the guidelines, as seems to be the case and as the Minister assures us — I am sure that he will set it out clearly — are what will deliver the meaningful changes in how schools manage their uniform policies and reduce costs, how schools are held accountable in how they follow or do not follow the guidelines is absolutely crucial. The Committee was satisfied, on balance, that the amendments struck a balance between requiring the Department to intervene when guidelines are breached and ensuring that the process is open and transparent. <BR /> <BR />I understand that there is likely to be debate on the amendments. It was rehearsed at length in Committee how best to do this. How do you find the balance?”
“There was a concern that the enabling powers around the cost cap could gather dust for years with no formal mechanism for Members to hold the Minister and Department to account on whether the Bill was delivering for parents and whether the cost cap needed to be implemented. The Committee believes that the new clause addresses that risk and puts in place robust accountability measures that, I hope, Members will support. I may, if given permission, speak to that amendment as a private Member later. <BR /> <BR />The Committee's intention around amendment Nos 9, 11 and 12 is to improve accountability in situations where the Department is concerned that schools are not following the required guidelines.”
“There was also agreement on the need to monitor and report on those costs and for the Department to consider whether it was necessary to introduce a cap on uniform costs. The Committee agreed that introducing a regular report on that would identify areas of concern and improve our ability to scrutinise the impact of the Bill. The Bill had no such provisions. It created enabling powers around a cost cap. I must emphasise that the evidence that we heard from parents and anti-poverty groups was clear that the cost cap was where they would like to see the intervention of the legislation.”
“We felt that that would likely result in a review being carried out each mandate, which, we felt, would be an appropriate and necessary measure to ensure that effectiveness was routinely given attention by the Department. <BR /> <BR />Mindful of the importance of the guidelines, the Committee decided on amendment No 4 as a measure of post-legislative scrutiny to require the Department to formally lay them before the Assembly. That would ensure that the Committee and Members remained up to date and clearly informed in a timely manner about any changes to the guidelines made under the Bill. <BR /> <BR />I turn to amendment No 8. Throughout the Committee's consideration of the Bill, repeated concern was raised by stakeholders and members across our evidence sessions about the cost of uniforms.”
“Several witnesses highlighted concern about the wording of clause 1 regarding the proposed frequency of review of the guidelines. It is currently framed as "from time to time". The Committee was conscious that review mechanisms of the legislation would create milestones to improve efficiency and flexibility of the guidelines but would also create opportunities for reflection, post-legislation, on whether the implementation of the guidelines aligned with the objective of the legislation of reducing costs. The Committee felt that it was entirely reasonable that a period of at least once every three years for review would give clarity and continuity.”
“<BR /> <BR />On 1 July, the Committee undertook its formal clause-by-clause consideration and agreed 23 amendments to the clauses drafted. Twelve of those amendments were selected for debate, plus an additional amendment from the Minister. <BR /> <BR />With that summary of our process, I move to the Committee's proposed amendments in group 1, which, as the Speaker has referenced, refer to the monitoring and enforcement of the guidelines. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 1, which relates to clause 1, specifies the frequency of the review of guidelines. The Committee's research and stakeholder feedback quickly identified a widely held view that there was substantial appetite among stakeholders to have aspects of measures proposed in the Bill more precisely defined.”
“Members will know from their constituency offices how much pressure the cost of school uniforms brings to bear on family finances. The Committee also sought to ensure the best interests of every child and non-discrimination principles in the Bill, and it was interested in limiting contracts with retailers that might amount to market dominance. The Committee sought to improve transparency around available sanctions for breaches of the guidelines on uniform policy and to improve complaint-handling and implementation reports for the future monitoring of the Bill's effectiveness. Those are the intended impacts of the proposed amendments that have been accepted for debate, notwithstanding the fact that a range of amendments that were put forward have not been accepted. Of course, that was a decision not for the Committee but for the Speaker.”
“To my mind — I think all members agreed — that would have been a significant and substantial assistance to the scrutiny process, particularly for clarity with regard to the provisions of clause 7 and the enforceability of the guidelines. The Committee had no desire to create unnecessary levels of prescription in the Bill with any proposed amendment, but, without sight of the draft guidelines, it, at times, felt compelled to insist on prescription to satisfy members as to the effectiveness of the guidelines that would flow from the legislation. <BR /> <BR />In delivering the Committee stage, the Committee's priorities were clear. We wanted to ensure that there would be robust measures to deliver affordability for parents. That was a priority for all members.”
“Therefore, we endeavoured to complete our task by 2 July 2025, and we succeeded. <BR /> <BR />Later in the Committee Stage, concerns were expressed by some members around the Department's engagement on the Bill. There was a query about whether there had been a miscalculation of time frames and the necessary resourcing to deliver the Bill. For the sake of balance, I would add that, in its responses and engagement with the Committee, the Department strenuously contested that assertion. <BR /> <BR />I am sure that this will get much debate today in the Chamber, but the Committee was not given sight of the Department's proposed guidelines for schools on their uniform policies. That is the principal outworking of the legislation. Initially, we were given a clear assurance that those would be provided.”
“<BR /> <BR />It was notable that, at the Committee Stage extension debate, members expressed their intention to be available to facilitate the shorter time frame. It is a credit to members that we remained quorate for the whole process when, at times, we were convening two or three times a week through May and June, often during plenary sittings. I pay tribute to the Clerk and Committee staff team, who facilitated every meeting with the administration and record-keeping needed to keep the process moving effectively. <BR /> <BR />That is not to say that the shorter stage did not create challenges. For example, with the extension date running to 30 August, we considered how appropriate or feasible it would be to engage with education stakeholders during the holiday period for them.”
“That was agreed as the end date of the Committee Stage. <BR /> <BR />I put it on record again that I did not support that date of extension. I felt that the Committee needed more time to scrutinise the Bill, and we found that our processes became incredibly rushed towards the end. Undoubtedly in my mind, there was evidence that we would like to have heard from a range of stakeholders, particularly schools and school leaders, but that we were unable to hear. The shorter timeline meant that the Committee Stage required significant reorganisation of the Committee's schedule of work, and we had to consider the availability of members as well as the times and spaces required to facilitate our engagement with stakeholders in order to give us the opportunity to deliberate on the Bill.”
“On 25 March 2025, the Minister wrote to the Committee outlining the process for the publication of information around school uniform policies by schools and the corresponding timelines being observed by the Department in an attempt to facilitate the publication of guidelines, which is a key part of the Bill and forthcoming Act. The Department flagged the tight turnaround times and urged the Committee to conduct a Committee Stage to complete by summer recess. <BR /> <BR />The Committee set a longer Committee Stage, which was to complete in December 2025. The motion was agreed on 18 March. The motion and amendment in relation to the timeline was debated in a plenary session here on 7 April 2025. It proposed an extension of the Committee Stage to 30 August rather than the longer date proposed by the Committee.”
“With your permission, I will make some comment on the Committee Stage of the School Uniforms (Guidelines and Allowances) Bill before speaking directly to the first group of amendments. The Committee ran a robust scrutiny stage despite the constrained timescales imposed on it, and I will give a brief overview of how that stage was conducted. <BR /> <BR />The Bill was introduced on 18 February 2025 and referred to the Committee for Education for consideration after Second Stage on 3 March 2025. The Committee received 19 written submissions and took evidence from 14 stakeholders in oral evidence sessions. I record the Committee's thanks to all who took the time to engage with us on the Bill and to inform our deliberations. <BR /> <BR />I turn to the timeline of our process.”
“Minister, you referenced biosecurity in your previous answer. Will you provide a more detailed update on your efforts to ensure biosecurity on the island of Ireland?”