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 14 of 21.
“The Committee agreed that the components are: a call for evidence not equivalent to the Department's consultation timeline but a first chance for the public to consider and reflect on the provisions in the draft law; oral evidence sessions on the substance of the Bill; Committee deliberation on the evidence received in those oral evidence sessions; further engagement with departmental officials to answer queries that may arise from evidence sessions and the Committee members' consideration of the Bill; development and consideration, in conjunction with the Bill Clerk if required, 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.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee took primary legislation guidance on 8 January and, again, when the Bill was introduced in March. The Committee then took pre-legislative and introductory briefings from departmental officials, had procedural advice from the Committee and Bill Clerks and discussed the components and reasonable time frames for good Committee Stage scrutiny.”
“In my capacity as the Chair of the Education Committee, I propose the Committee's motion to extend the Committee Stage of the School Uniforms (Guidelines and Allowances) Bill to 3 December 2025. I will outline how the Committee agreed on the motion and the extension date. Although, it is worth noting that we are in a slightly unusual context because parties have confirmed, via the media, that they will support the amendment rather than the agreed Committee motion. Speaking as Chair, I can frame my remarks only around what was discussed and agreed formally in our meetings. I cannot speak to the contributions of other parties subsequent to that, outside the Committee structures. <BR /> <BR />For the first part of the debate, I will limit my remarks to my role as Chair but I may conclude with some remarks as an Alliance MLA.”
“I will pick up on Colin McGrath's question and your response to it in a bit more detail, Minister. When it is finally published, will the Priorities for Youth policy set out clearly the Department's policy on whether the community and voluntary sector is to be the primary delivery mechanism for youth services in Northern Ireland?”
“I thank the Member for his answer. Will he provide the details of any consultation that was undertaken with disability groups during the drafting of the new determination?”
“Does the Member agree that, in the past decade, around £1 billion has been spent on shared education projects and that, while those may be positive experiences for those pupils, that money could be better spent on delivering an excellent education system?”
“This morning, there will be an opportunity to meet local patients and clinicians who want to be part of the solution. From 1.00 pm, there will be formal contributions to set out the group's asks. Those patients have waited years to see even very small progress. I hope that Members from across all parties will engage with them and get behind their campaign for better services.”
“That is why I support the call that will be made at the event today for what are, initially, small, modest asks: access to specialist facial therapy treatments and access to psychological support, which can be vital for those patients. They are very small stepping stones to a better, properly mapped service in Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the fact that the Health Minister plans to speak at the event today, but I urge him not just to make a speech and leave. I urge him to take the time to engage with the patients who will be there today and to listen to their stories about their journey in trying to access healthcare so that he can understand the impact of not getting the right treatment and how that affects their lives every day. <BR /> <BR />I encourage all Members to attend the event today.”
“Six years later, in 2025, the pathway remains under development and no in-reach service has been established, despite my understanding that funding was made available for it. <BR /> <BR />It is unacceptable that facial palsy patients, who need interventions across a range of clinical disciplines, are left on waiting lists indefinitely. They are often then seen by a clinician who does not have the relevant expertise to treat them. Some progress has been made, and I welcome the investment in signposting on nidirect for those patients, the awareness-raising work that has been done with GPs and the work of a small team in the Health Department to map out a pathway. However, anyone living with facial palsy in Northern Ireland needs help now; they cannot be asked to wait any longer.”
“I raise again the issue of the lack of services for patients with facial palsy in Northern Ireland. I am privileged to sponsor an event today in the Long Gallery that has been organised by patient advocate, Janet Robb, and the charity Facial Palsy UK. The event forms part of an awareness-raising campaign by the charity to shine a light on the struggles of patients with facial palsy who are desperately trying to access appropriate healthcare. <BR /> <BR />In 2019, the then Health and Social Care Board (HSCB) made commitments to facial palsy patients that it would develop a pathway in Northern Ireland for treatment and that, crucially, while we waited for it, an in-reach service from GB would be put in place.”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. I acknowledge the extra funding and the fact that it was welcome. However, Minister, do you acknowledge that not having the approved admissions number on which a statutory setting relies as the basis for its planning creates uncertainty for those settings and a real challenge in making them viable in the long term?”
“There is so much inequity in the system, and it is not a level playing field for those settings. It would be good to hear the Minister's response to those points.”
“That does not make sense to those settings, and they do not understand how it is appropriate. They also have to charge for non-target-age children, which makes their setting less desirable. <BR /> <BR />There are a lot of issues that affect non-statutory settings. I want to hear clearly from the Minister today whether he will review the policy. It is easy to bash the EA, but, in many ways in this scenario, the EA is just implementing a policy that has been passed down to it from the Department, and it is a policy that does not afford a lot of discretion. On that basis, it would be good to hear from the Minister whether, given that standardisation is coming in, which is a big change in the system and is welcome, the policy on how we deal with non-statutory settings will be reviewed.”
“A family recently contacted me about that. They were asked to make close to a one-hour bus trip to get to a setting that is technically within the five-mile radius, but, if you do not have a car, that is not always appropriate. <BR /> <BR />One of the big frustrations that non-statutory settings raise repeatedly is that statutory settings — I am not trying to denigrate their provision; there are brilliant statutory settings out there, and we are really lucky to have such great provision across Northern Ireland — are being funded to provide places for non-target-age children. Our non-statutory settings struggle to understand how it can be that a statutory setting down the road is funded to bring in non-target-age children when they have to turn away parents of target-age children because of the PAN.”
“We have a system that relies heavily on parental choice, yet, in many communities, parents who apply to the local non-statutory setting, which may be right in the middle of the community in which they live, and to which they want to send their child, have no confidence that they will get a place, because, if the Department cuts the numbers, those places will not be available, even if parental demand is there. That often means that parents in rural areas — this is the case in my constituency, and I am sure that it is the same in West Tyrone — are asked to travel unrealistic distances to get to the next setting. I know that the Department has a policy on provision within a five-mile radius, but that often places families who rely on public transport in a scenario where there simply is no other viable option for them.”
“Crucially, the livelihoods of the dedicated staff who choose to work in those settings and who provide high-quality early years education — it is early years education; they deliver exactly the same level and quality of provision that we find in our statutory settings — are threatened on an annual cycle, year in, year out, and that is not acceptable. It cannot be that, every February, those staff have a concern that they will get that notice: "Sorry; the PAN for your setting has been reduced, and there is no job for you". That does not paint a good picture about how we value those staff. <BR /> <BR />The issue also impacts on parental confidence in the system.”
“When the Minister responds, I would like to hear him set out what he will do about the clear recommendation in the independent review on addressing the disadvantage that non-statutory providers face and whether he will take that forward. <BR /> <BR />As I said, I receive a high volume of local contact on this matter. Most of the issues have been covered here already, but the impact of the policy cannot be overstated. Those excellent settings provide high-quality early years provision, yet, every year, the Department affords them no stability. They cannot plan financially for investments in their setting.”
“I thank the Member for securing the Adjournment debate. It is focused on West Tyrone, so I will try not to take up too much time or speak about other areas, but I welcome the Member's comments at the start that it is an issue that affects every part of Northern Ireland. I am sure that, at this time of year, every Member, whichever area they represent, is being contacted by preschools that are impacted on by how the PAN policy is applied. <BR /> <BR />I begin my remarks by tracking back to the independent review of education, which clearly highlighted the discrepancy between statutory and non-statutory preschool provision. Non-statutory providers — the sorts of groups that we are talking about today — are clearly disadvantaged by the current funding model and child ratios, which we are all aware of.”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. There is much to welcome, but, as always, the issue will be the delivery rather than just the aspiration. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the fact that there is a focus on investment in teacher professional development. Teachers report being overworked, however, and feeling that they spend far too much of their time on tasks that do not directly impact on children's education. If the strategy is to be a success, we need teachers to be freed up to teach. How will the Minister tackle the ongoing issues around teacher workload so that the strategy can be a success?”
“The Minister will be aware of the attention that has been paid to minor works projects and how they are prioritised. Does he support undertaking a review at EA and departmental level of how those projects are prioritised so that the public's confidence can be restored that it is the most deserving projects that will go forward in any financial year?”
“We also want to avoid any system in which one local contractor gets all the work for one school. I look forward to hearing from the Minister on that. Also, where a personal relationship between a contractor and a principal or a member of the board of governors could lead to preferential treatment, we want assurances that that will be avoided. <BR /> <BR />Aside from those concerns, I am happy to support the calls in the motion and the amendment to deliver flexibility and better value for money in our procurement system. Aside from some of the clarifications that I have sought from the Minister, I am happy to confirm my support and that of the Alliance Party for the motion and the amendment.”
“It is about the flexibility afforded to schools in that space. The Minister also referenced the EA's looking to roll out a new system with more flexibility for schools needing lower-level maintenance services, particularly those worth £5,000 and less. Again, that sounds welcome, but can the Minister clearly set out how that will definitely remove the bureaucracy? Can he provide assurances that it will deliver better value for money? <BR /> <BR />All Members will probably reflect that, while we are keen to see better value for money delivered and more autonomy for our school leaders, any revised system must have safety, quality and transparency at its heart to ensure that any work carried out is of high quality and that our schools remain safe environments for our children.”
“As I said, we all have examples. Through the EA service, one school was quoted in the region of £20,000 to paint a corridor. It is a big corridor, but that is a lot of money. The school knew that it could secure that service for a fraction of the price through a local contractor. I also know a principal who needed toilets repaired and was quoted £167 per toilet. The caretaker was able to source a part for £6 that did the job for each toilet. We cannot be operating in a context that gives good value for money. <BR /> <BR />Last week, it was positive to hear the Minister confirm that new EA maintenance service contracts have been set up and will roll out in the coming weeks. I am keen to hear the Minister specifically assure us that those contracts will deliver better value for money. However, the issue goes beyond the contracts.”
“We have school leaders who are rightly incredulous, as, in some cases, they stare into substantial deficits and really struggle to find levers that they can pull to resolve the issue. They are looking at having to spend additional money out of the public purse, when they know that they could secure items and services more cheaply. The principals whom I speak to are clear on this. They have many examples, and we could all list such examples, some of which are shocking almost to the point of being comical. However, they are not comical, because it is public money, and we should take how we spend public money seriously.”
“Anyone who was in for that debate will be familiar with the direction of travel in which we may go and particularly with how the Minister may frame his remarks. <BR /> <BR />The main area on which I receive feedback from school leaders when I engage with them is maintenance. That issue is highlighted again and again. As Peter Martin mentioned, controlled and maintained schools, in particular, are in a constrained context. I will not rehearse the details of that, as Peter covered it in detail, but it seems that, invariably, the items or services procured via the EA service turn out to be more expensive — not in all cases but in many. <BR /> <BR />We all know just how constrained school budgets are. Cathy Mason highlighted that clearly in her opening remarks.”
“I support the motion and confirm that we have no issue with supporting the DUP amendment. I suspect that the debate will consist largely of Members agreeing on all of the substantive issues that we are discussing. <BR /> <BR />Before I begin any detailed remarks, I record my interest as a governor at Killinchy Primary School. Like all schools in Northern Ireland, it is impacted directly by these issues. <BR /> <BR />Members had the opportunity to rehearse a lot of the key issues in the motion last week, when Emma Sheerin brought an Adjournment debate to the Chamber specifically looking at procurement policies in the Mid Ulster context. The debate, of course, widened out to cover issues in the procurement landscape for all schools.”
“I thank the Minister for his answer and look forward to further announcements. <BR /> <BR />The Minister will be aware of the leading work that Riverside Farm in Ballyalton, which falls within the new Strangford constituency boundaries, has been delivering through nature-friendly farming practice. Will he join me on a visit to the farm to see its excellent work at first hand?”
“I emphasise that, yes, we want robust scrutiny of public money, but we must deliver value for money for our schools.”
“It could not just be a nod to someone who lives down the road to say, "You do that, and we will make sure that we get you in to cut the grass for ever and ever and never ask anyone else". These processes should be robust, and we all need to be careful and cautious when public money is being spent, but value for money has to be balanced against that. <BR /> <BR />I take encouragement from the Minister's previous comments that he is keen to look at the issue, so I am hopeful that, when he responds to the debate, which clearly has relevance in Mid Ulster and across Northern Ireland, there will be a sense of a clear timeline in which we will see some improvement in this area. I thank the Member for securing the Adjournment debate today.”
“In 2017, when the EA was established, we were promised that it was going to deliver economies of scale and that schools would benefit from those savings because the EA would be able to deliver that for them. While centralised procurement may provide a degree of consistency and a degree of central oversight, which is not necessarily a bad thing, it certainly has not delivered value for money. We need to find a way to reset that balance. I definitely echo comments made by other Members that we do not want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. All these processes need to be subject to appropriate and robust scrutiny, so, whatever the EA would do to review its procurement processes to deliver better value for money for schools, there needs to be oversight.”
“Principals should not feel that they are constrained by contracts procured by the EA that end up costing them more money.”
“That could mean anything from cutting the grass, to cleaning the gutters, to buying play resource equipment for the lower end of the school.”
“Many are staring into budget deficits that they cannot see a way out of because of the pressures that they are under, particularly from staffing costs. I declare an interest: I sit on the board of governors of Killinchy Primary School, and so I am well aware of the budget pressures that are faced and the difficult position that principals are in when they go to their board of governors to say, "I have had to spend x on this because the EA procured the service, as was required, but I know that so-and-so down the road could have done it for a fraction of the price". It is very frustrating. <BR /> <BR />The message is clear: schools should be freed up to source the best value for money in low-level, routine maintenance and spending.”
“I do not want to speak for long: I certainly would not want to step on the toes of any of the Mid Ulster reps, and I will not go into examples from my constituency. Every Member who is here has highlighted the fact that, when you visit a school principal, they will complain about the ridiculous scenario in which, on the one hand, they are pressed by the EA to deliver financial sustainability because budgets are under so much pressure, and, on the other, they are compelled to pay over the odds for EA-procured services. That is an incredibly frustrating position for custodians of public money to be in. <BR /> <BR />I echo the comments that have been made. All school leaders find that scenario really frustrating.”
“I have no doubt that we will be here in another year's time debating those pressures in Education if we do not start the difficult, long-tem work of delivering meaningful system-level transformation. The Committee is certainly up for that work. Certainly, in my role as Alliance's education spokesperson, I am. I hope that the Minister is as well.”
“My colleague Eóin Tennyson highlighted the £250,000 spend on mobile phone pouches when school buildings are crumbling, a blanket capital spend announcement on outdoor play equipment and IT when we have schools saying that that may not necessarily reflect their individual needs, and clearly accepting, in public statements, that the funding of our schools may not be fair and equitable but not, as yet, as far as I am aware, taking forward any review of the funding formula that delivers that. We need to see a commitment from the Minister to delivering genuine transformation in education. <BR /> <BR />There are no quick fixes or easy answers in this space. I will always commend the Minister if he makes steps in the right direction, as he has done with childcare investment, although it is only a start.”
“To be very clear: the Committee has asked for a review of the system for allocating minor works capital funding, so that will clearly take in more than one school. <BR /> <BR />I do not underestimate the scale of the challenge facing the Education Minister. He has set out many times the financial pressures that his Department faces. We all agree in the Chamber that our public services are underfunded, as many contributors have mentioned. All will continue to make that case. However, given the pressures that arise from underfunding, the Education Minister must be rigorous in his approach to his budget. Questions need to be asked about some decisions.”
“In the context of a hugely pressured budgetary position, and with unavoidable pressures in the region of £200 million having been highlighted and other pressures taking that figure much higher, it is my view and that of my party that openness, transparency and accountability in public finances are absolutely essential. It has therefore been concerning that, when concerns around minor capital works funding in particular have been raised, the Minister has not joined other Members and agreed that how those allocations are made should be reviewed. He has not supported that but instead seems content to delegate that to the EA. I reiterate that call. If we are to have confidence in how the budget is being spent this year, there must be full openness and transparency in that regard.”
“The Committee is committed, across the parties, to work to tackle that underfunding of education and to make the case, for education and all our public services, that we need that additional investment from Westminster. <BR /> <BR />That concludes my remarks as Chair of the Committee. I will now make some remarks in my capacity as Alliance MLA and education spokesperson. <BR /> <BR />Members will be aware that the Education Department's budget and decisions by the Education Minister have been in sharp focus in recent days. In particular, concerns have been highlighted about the level of scrutiny that has been applied to minor capital works funding over the past financial year. Those have been aired in the Chamber, and rightly so.”
“The Committee has expressed concern that, as a key Executive priority, SEN transformation seems to have a reliance on transformation funding and on monitoring rounds to deliver what should be core spend, but it is indicative of the level of pressure that is being felt to deliver even statutory functions. The Committee will therefore continue to explore in detail how SEN transformation can be more effectively resourced and delivered. <BR /> <BR />The Committee is clear, and agrees with the independent review of education panel, that education here is not funded sustainably and that that undoubtedly has an impact on the day-to-day education of our children and young people and places huge strain on the education workforce.”
“<BR /> <BR />In the October monitoring round, the Department bid for £88·78 million to cover capital DEL pressures but, by the conclusion of the January monitoring round, only £12·5 million in capital funding had been reallocated to the Department. It is therefore clear that significant resource and capital pressures remain. Officials were at pains to emphasise to the Committee that those pressures of £189 million were only those that could be described as inescapable and that many, many more were putting the regular delivery of education services under severe pressure. <BR /> <BR />The Committee is keen to know more, particularly in the capital space, about the resourcing of major and minor capital works, how those are identified and prioritised, and about the resourcing of vital SEN transformation work.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee did, however, receive a written January monitoring briefing that highlighted the in-year fluctuations since the October monitoring round. Back in October, the Department of Education's inescapable pressures were assessed at £189·4 million, against which it received £170 million in resource DEL via October monitoring. Those pressures were largely covering the EA block grant for special educational needs (SEN) and non-SEN, the aggregated schools budget, departmental staffing costs and moneys for the 2024 teacher pay award. At the January monitoring round, pressures of around £20 million were still in place, but, at that time, a resource allocation of £1·5 million was all that was secured. That means that pressures, largely in the space of SEN services in education, remain acute.”
“I rise, first, in my capacity as Chairperson of the Education Committee to address the spring Supplementary Estimates and the Vote on Account. I am advised that the Department has had no Excess Votes in the relevant period, so I will not be addressing that. <BR /> <BR />The Committee is, of course, aware that this is a largely retrospective debate today and that, aside from securing the authority for spending to the end of the financial year and the early part of the next, significant changes to departmental budgets are now highly unlikely. That said, the Committee would have liked to have had an up-to-date budget briefing from the Department and is still awaiting a long-anticipated capital budget briefing from the Department, which we have been seeking since around November last year. Those have yet to be brought forward.”
“In correspondence from the Minister's Department, the Education Committee recently learned that the number of allied health professionals (AHPs) available to the education system is not known. However, a workforce strategy does not appear to be a year 1 action in the Minister's new delivery plan for special educational needs transformation. Will the Minister urgently undertake a workforce strategy plan in conjunction with Health so that we know how many allied health professionals are available to the education system for the children who desperately need them?”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. The Minister will be aware of certain housing schemes where the influence of paramilitarism is really significant, such as Weavers Grange in Newtownards. Clanmil Housing has long been dealing with ongoing issues and managing the influence of paramilitarism there. Will the Minister provide an assessment of the level of data-sharing between housing associations and the PSNI to help effectively tackle the impacts of paramilitarism and paramilitary influence on housing schemes?”
“I urge all parties to take off the table the language that is causing suspicion and genuine concern among the teaching workforce and to get back around the table to deliver the pay deal and to put the money that has been secured to the purpose for which it should be used, which is to deliver a fair pay settlement.”
“Teachers, school leaders, parents and all other stakeholders in the education system need to do the necessary work to ensure that action short of strike can be avoided. Surely the best and most effective way in which to avoid it is to deal with the issue that drives it, which is workload. The Minister needs to instil confidence that previous recommendations will be delivered on in a timely fashion. <BR /> <BR />This is not the time to be creating red lines. There should be no barrier on the management side to getting back around the table. Threats of "considering options" for teachers who are not carrying out contractual obligations should be withdrawn, and a resolution should be found. The Minister cannot be allowed to take credit for a pay deal when it is delivered yet take no responsibility when it is not. He cannot have it both ways.”
“Concerningly, it seems that the unions have misjudged the strength of feeling among their members on the issue. <BR /> <BR />There is the potential for a substantial overreach by the Minister in the negotiation. He seems to be insistent that the pay deal must have strings attached. It is not being offered freely. For teachers who hear a lot of words about workload but see little evidence of real change in their day-to-day pressures, that has proved to be a bridge too far. I will be clear: action short of strike has a substantial and negative impact on our school system, and I make no argument on that point. The people who feel its impact most strongly are our children and young people. It is therefore in everybody's interest to avoid that happening.”
“The failure to secure a settlement on teachers' pay over the past number of days represents a genuine crisis point for our education system. Following the restoration of the institutions and the delivery of a pay deal last year, we should have been building on a platform of trust to restore relations. It is deeply regrettable that trust in this place now seems to be in such short supply. It is clear that teachers simply did not trust management and, by proxy, the Minister. They were required to commit to a period of industrial harmony if the deal was to be accepted. Teachers feel that they have been asked to forfeit rights — to give them up — and to take it on trust that the Department will deliver on long-overdue workload reforms.”
“Our call in our amendment is for the Economy and Education Ministers to take up the challenge together and set out a really clear vision, which the independent review called for, of what we actually want from our post-16 provision. It should be broad and ambitious. It should not be competitive. It should be collaborative. That is the space in which we need to end up. I hope that, on that basis, the House supports our amendment.”