COMMITTEE FOR EDUCATION
OFFICIAL REPORT
(Hansard)
Education Bill
6 May 2009
Members present for all or part of the proceedings:
Mr Mervyn Storey (Chairperson)
Mr Dominic Bradley (Deputy Chairperson)
Mrs Mary Bradley
Mr Tom Elliott
Mr Trevor Lunn
Mr Nelson McCausland
Mr Basil McCrea
Miss Michelle McIlveen
Mr John O’Dowd
Mrs Michelle O’Neill
Witnesses:
Ms Frances Donnelly )
Ms Lorna McAlpine ) Northern Ireland Council for Integrated Education
Mr Michael Wardlow )
Mr Liam Mac Giolla Mheana )
Mr Seán Ó Coinn ) Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta
Mr Caoimhín Ó Peatáin )
Mr Chris Stewart ) Department of Education
The Chairperson (Mr Storey):
Michael, Frances and Lorna, you are very welcome. I invite you to make a presentation and members will ask questions about it. Papers on this topic are in members’ packs.
Mr Michael Wardlow (Northern Ireland Council for Integrated Education):
I have attended the Committee several times. However, I am not sure whether, as we work through this, you want us to stop when a question arises, or whether you want us to run straight through our presentation and answer questions at the end. What is easiest for you?
The Chairperson:
The practice to date has been that witnesses make a presentation and members ask their questions afterwards.
Mr Wardlow:
Members have received our short written presentation. We propose to elaborate on a few points in the ten minutes available. My two colleagues will speak on two specific areas. Some of our points are reports or comments, but there are one or two areas on which we would like to focus. As we understand it, there will be a second Education Bill. We have some questions that may be dealt with in greater detail as that second Bill is brought forward. We will raise those issues as headlines.
Since the start of this process, we have welcomed the opportunity for educational reform. Whatever we think about the Education and Skills Authority (ESA) and its duties, the fact that there will be one body to co-ordinate and supervise the long overdue review of education is to be welcomed. We also welcome the fact that there will be a number of sectoral support bodies. Parental choice is at the core of the education system, and it is important that the schools that represent the sectors have support bodies to work alongside them, particularly as much of what is represented in those schools falls under the term “ethos”. We are glad that the council will be one of those sectoral support bodies, and we look forward to seeing what the business case is and how it will work out for the 60 schools involved.
It is good that the process is being dealt with equitably. We thank the civil servants, Chris Stewart and others, who have worked with us to ensure that everything is done equitably. We do not want people to feel that some are better off and some worse off in this process.
As to general observations, we are supportive of the concept of an education and skills authority. We welcome that it will act as a single employing and administrative body to carry out the policy implications of education. That said, we have one or two concerns about its functions and will raise them as we work through the process. However, in broad principle, we welcome it.
At the outset, I must point out that the Government have a duty under the Education Reform (Northern Ireland) Order 1989 to encourage and facilitate integrated schools and, latterly, Irish-medium schools. We want that duty to be made clearer, and we will come back to that issue later. At present, it is taken for granted that the 1989 Order will not change and that the duty to encourage and facilitate will continue to fall on the Department. We will return to how we would like to see that evidenced by the ESA.
We also like the idea of an education advisory forum with equal representation that is presented in a number of papers, particularly policy paper 19. Our organisation, in common with others, is driven by parental demand. The very fact that we are engaging with a broader constituency and helping to advise on policy is important.
I must flag up that a third of a million people in our education system are under the age of 18, so young people should have some level of representation on that forum. I can advocate for young people, but I cannot speak on their behalf. The best people to represent young people and to voice their needs are young people themselves. As the Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People (NICCY) shows, that can be done. However that forum is structured, the questioning voice of young people must not be lost. They have a right to be consulted on everything that affects them under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), and that must not be just lip service. I want to see those rights at the core of education policy.
It is unfortunate that the duty to transform — in other words, for schools to opt to change their status — is, at present, often only one-way. We accepted in earlier discussions that schools can transform to become integrated but cannot transform from being controlled to Catholic maintained, which seems bizarre when there is a number of controlled schools of a majority-Catholic nature. If they wanted to become Catholic maintained schools, for whatever reason, they cannot do it by law.
I believe that the Bill presents a good opportunity to review the legislation around transformation. We are not sure what that will look like, but we guess is that it will be included in the second Bill. When the education boards go, the legislation that was introduced to allow transformation to take place must be amended. We will be interested to see how that will work, because we envisage that most growth in the integrated sector will come about through transforming schools and more sharing.
Those are my straightforward, specific comments. Lorna will speak about the employing authority, and Frances will then discuss the training function.
Ms Lorna McAlpine (Northern Ireland Council for Integrated Education):
We are very pleased that there will be a single employing authority and that all teaching and non-teaching staff will have the same terms and conditions. Roughly a third of our schools are controlled integrated schools and two-thirds are grant-maintained integrated schools. In their role as employers, those grant-maintained integrated schools have always set their own terms and conditions, which have generally mirrored those in the controlled and maintained sectors. However, money has not always been made readily available to deal with matters such as job evaluation. Consequently, some schools may have slightly different terms and conditions.
We look forward to trying to ensure that finance is available for job evaluation and harmonisation. Thought must be given to how best to roll out that process in order to treat all staff equally under a single employing authority. It is also important to have an employment scheme in the sector, because we want the freedom to ensure that staff who are recruited maintain and support the ethos of integrated education.
Mr Wardlow:
I was disappointed by the suggestion in some of the earlier papers that ethos is something that is specific to schools, and that there is no higher understanding of ethos. Organisations that regard themselves as ethos-driven, such as ours, believe that there is an integrated ethos. That ethos may be applied differently in our 62 schools, but there is a core need to have it supported centrally. The appointment to a school of someone with a nodding acquaintance of ethos is wrong and should not happen.
In the past, the Department has nominated to boards of governors people who have had very little understanding of, let alone a belief in, integration. It does not help when people without a commitment to the integrated ethos are appointed to boards of governors. Although I speak for the integrated sector, the principle can be applied right across all sectors. If we are to protect, maintain and develop ethos, it is important that the stakeholders and the people who hold that in trust at least understand what that ethos is.
Ms Frances Donnelly (Northern Ireland Council for Integrated Education):
I will discuss ethos in relation to training and delivery. The ESA will be responsible for training and advisory functions for all schools. The Committee may be aware that ethos is a central element of the Every School a Good School policy. Moreover, it is considered critical to school improvement. Therefore, we want the ESA to identify how it will support schools in their development of ethos.
There should be an acceptance that sectoral support bodies have many years’ expertise in, and experience of, dealing with efficiency and effectiveness, particularly in developing ethos and supporting staff. In the future, the ESA should have regard to that fact in order to avoid duplication across the agencies. There are 60 integrated schools, and we will continue to work with them to develop specific training. Furthermore, it provides an opportunity for increased partnership, because, as schools collaborate more and move into partnerships, the idea of ethos and developing support for delivering education in a more diverse environment will be significant. We must ensure that the sectoral support bodies do not carry out functions that are part of the ESA’s obligations.
Mr Wardlow:
I will make some concluding comments, including a couple of observations, and I will outline two areas about which we are concerned.
We welcome the fact that, under clause 36, part-time teachers will now be eligible to be on governing bodies. That is reasonable progress. Clause 16 mentions that the ESA will manage schools’ capital expenditure — however that is routed through the Strategic Investment Board and the Assembly, it is important to maintain principles of equity. The integrated sector has existed since 1981 only, and 40 of the 60 schools had to prove their viability before the Department approved them. That has meant that a charity has taken a loan of £20 million a year for the past 10 years. That has placed a charitable body in a precarious situation.
We have been told that that is the price that we must pay for front-loading integration. In fact, the problem is that there is no integrated choice, because 5,000 people have been turned away in the past seven years. NICIE contends that there is now an opportunity to consider the capital estate on an equitable basis and, rather than make integrated schools take a different route to Irish-language schools, controlled schools and maintained schools, we should be treated the same. That will not happen unless real area-based planning, as recommended by George Bain, is placed at the core of the proposals.
At the minute, I am involved in area-based planning that considers curriculum entitlement for children after the age of 14, but that is not the same thing. We believe that there is an opportunity to not only reinforce the vision or to tinker around the edges, but to give significant consideration to the educational estate, which has too many schools and 50,000 spare places. It should not simply be a knee-jerk reaction; we must look ahead and consider what the school estate should be in the context of future parental demand.
Clause 23 lists the duties of the Department for Employment and Learning and the Department of Education. The duty to encourage and facilitate integrated education, which is outlined in the 1989 Order, is not included. I want to ensure that the Department still has such a duty and a process to confirm that it delivers on it. That duty may be changed in the future. However, two statutory duties currently exist — one to promote the Irish language and one to promote integration. NICIE wants to ensure that the Department’s duty remains and that it is audited.
We are concerned that there is no mention of a duty on either Department to promote community or good relations — as we would have referred to in the past — or a shared future. I was a member of the Towards a Culture of Tolerance: Integrating Education working group, through which all education parties signed up to placing a culture of tolerance at the core of education. I do not accept that that should be displaced by an equality agenda, because equality and community relations and cohesion sit together. Unless equity and diversity are viewed as being interdependent in schools, division is simply being reinforced. We reflect the fact that the duty to encourage shared education— not necessarily through integration but through the possibility of a more fluid system and the promotion of good community relations with equality — is not there.
We are concerned by the fact that politicians will make up the majority of the board of the ESA. Such a situation is not part of our operating principle. Partly because of our history, and partly because of where education sits, the ESA should not have a majority of politicians on its board. Even the fact that the education advisory forum is, in a sense, non-political does not take away from the fact that the people who will govern the ESA will come from political backgrounds.
If the ESA board members react in a similar way to the way in which the Committee has done, that would be a different situation. I have never seen an orange or a green card being played at this Committee. I do not say that simply as a compliment; I think that things have moved on. However, there is still a huge stasis in education that must be dealt with outside party politics. We do not support the ESA starting out with politicians being a majority on its board, and we want that to be addressed.
We welcome the fact that the board members will be paid. Our organisation has 62 schools, each of which has between 12 and 16 board members who do the job voluntarily, as does every member of every one of the boards of the 1,300 schools here. That is unseen money that goes into the system, and we think that people should be paid to sit on the board.
In conclusion, we are not clear about some aspects of the Bill. We are not clear on how a school will transform to integrated status in the future, how boards of governors will be constituted in the future now that the Transferor Representatives’ Council will have the right to nominate once again and how the capital estate will be developed and planned. Currently, we are positively disposed to the ESA, and, apart from the reservations that we have raised, we support the Bill.
The Chairperson:
I thank Michael, Lorna and Frances.
Given that the aim of the Minister and the Department is to have equality across the education sector and that Northern Ireland has a diverse education provision, is it any longer sustainable to have two elements of that educational provision protected and promoted to the disadvantage of the rest? You referred to the 1989 Order, and the Education (Northern Ireland) Order 1998 also makes reference to those sectors. Every time that this Committee has met since we began to consider the Bill, it has been said that we are seeking equality and that we will achieve that. It is good that your organisation is giving evidence, followed by CnaG. How do you explain the position to the other sectors that feel that they are not treated equitably in the way that, under legislation, the integrated sector and the Irish-medium sector are? The process is about sharing, moving on and not playing orange and green cards. It is about everyone aspiring to treat everyone equally. Unfortunately, an ‘Animal Farm’ situation exists, because when it comes down to the nitty-gritty, people are not really being open about how equal they want everyone to be treated.
Mr Wardlow:
I shall answer for the integrated education sector. Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta will give evidence later, and there is an issue over the Irish language being tied into the Good Friday/ Belfast Agreement, albeit under the 1998 Education Order as well. Our position is slightly different.
The process is about equality of outcome. We need to see how that can be achieved. It may be that, as was the case with employment for a time, some legislative framework is necessary — in that instance, positive discrimination was needed to enhance women’s employment opportunities. Without legislation, women would not now be in the place that they are now. Unfortunately, a legislative framework is required to achieve equality of outcome for parents who want Irish-language or integrated schools. I hope that, one day, the need for that will go, and I hope that, one day, parents will have the right to choose the type of education that they want.
The difference for integrated schools is that, since the establishment of the existing system in 1921 and its division in the 1930s and 1940s, there is now a system that divides seven ways. One third of a million children are divided seven ways: Protestant and Catholic, selective and non-selective, boys and girls, and everybody else. That is bizarre. I would not have started from this position, but that is the position that we are in.
The problem is that the option of attending integrated schools has been available only since 1981, not 1921. We have had to catch up on those 60 years. I would love to see the day when the legislation is no longer required, but there must be equality of outcome and of access, which is not the case at the moment. Despite the fact that there are declining rolls, and 50,000 spare places, the numbers of pupils at integrated schools have increased every year since 1981. We have turned 5,000 children away in the last seven years, and almost 1,000 last year. At the moment, there are not enough places for parents who wish to send their children to integrated schools.
Until we develop a system of area-based planning that will allow us to carry out community audits, our suggestion is that we go to communities and ask them what they want. That has been done in Omagh, and it has been proven that if one does a bit of polling and one works with people and explains to them what can be, it is possible to create the future. If area-based planning were undertaken, with areas being asked to consider what type of school they want, and if we were able to consider how to reach the situation in the next 10 years whereby parents who want Irish-language schools or integrated schools have that choice, then perhaps we would not need the legislation any more. However, I fear that, until there is equality of outcome, that will not be the case.
The Chairperson:
How do you square that with the fact that, having had that provision available to parents, one sector is still being treated differently from another? I want to link that with your view that there is a need for amendments to the transformation legislation. Since the creation of integrated schools, there has been transformation in one way only — from controlled to integrated. There has never been a transformation from a maintained school to an integrated school, despite the fact that there has been provision and opportunity for that.
There was a campaign to transform one particular school — I will not name it — and when the transformation took place the people who had led that transformation sent their children to a controlled school. That school went through turmoil, and both the school and the community were divided. That is not good for education. There comes a time when one has to say that although one is supportive of parental choice, one is also supportive of parental responsibility. Why have schools in the maintained sector, for example, not been encouraged to move from maintained to controlled status? Lorna made reference to some figures earlier. Did you say that there are maintained integrated schools?
Ms McAlpine:
There are grant-maintained integrated schools, such as the greenfield site integrated schools and Lagan College.
The Chairperson:
Those are not maintained schools that have transformed; they are new schools.
Ms McAlpine:
Yes, where transformation was not possible or was not seen as an option in the local area.
Mr Wardlow:
Very simply, if we lack a strategic context we will not get strategic outcomes. There is no planning for provision of integrated schools. We do not actually know how many people want them. What has happened in the past is that a school faced with closure, or looking down the line at the possibility of the opening of a new integrated school, will often consider transformation. That is not the way in which transformation should be done. It has never been our declared intention. In fact, we have set our faces against transformation as a way to save closures. That is not the way to do it, but that will be the case until there is a proactive planning context in which we go into an area before schools start to look at their own future.
Several schools recently approached our organisation when closure notices were issued, expecting that they would somehow be welcome to transform. If those same schools had attempted to plan integration five years ago, we could have delivered integrated outcomes without community disharmony. There is a lot of evidence about schools that have gone down that route. I am asking that, when we are considering area-based planning, the wishes of the community be considered. For example, our experience in Omagh was that when parents were offered an option to consider, they often did not know that it was available to them. Parents are very creative.
In relation to the Catholic maintained sector, a policy paper was sent to the Towards a Culture of Tolerance: Integrating Education working group, which is probably still on record, stating that the nature of Catholic education is such that a Catholic school is held in trust by the trustees, in perpetuity, for the Catholic community in that parish. The parents, therefore, do not have the right to vote to change the nature of that school, because that school is held in trust as opposed to being in some way democratically owned by the parents.
The legislation exists for such changes to happen in the controlled integrated sector, and a controlled school can become a hybrid controlled integrated school. It does not have to jump to become a fully autonomous grant-maintained school. In the Catholic sector, as I understand it, for a Catholic maintained school to become an integrated school, the only route open to it would be to become a grant-maintained integrated school — and, by its nature, therefore, it would no longer be a Catholic school.
Therefore, one of the arguments is that the same legislation does not exist: there is not an in-between Catholic integrated school. However, the other issue, as I understand it, is that the trustees would say that it does not lie in a parent’s gift to vote through a transformation process. That gift lies with the trustees.
That may or may not be the case. We have had requests from the parents of children at Catholic schools, and even from some teachers, who have talked to us about transformation. We would be willing to work with any school that comes to us — whether a selective or non-selective school, a boys’ or girls’ school, or a Catholic or Irish-language school — to see how we could creatively do something. However, the problem is that the system is piecemeal; it is a patchwork.
We have grant-maintained schools only because parents created them, and Brian Mawhinney approved them under the 1989 Order. It was not the Department’s idea. We are constantly trying to create new methods, whether integrating education with 80 schools or developing a Kitemark for sharing, which we would love the Department and the Education and Training Inspectorate to take forward.
In its shared future, Northern Ireland has to have a much more fluid education system. Integrated education is, we believe, an outcome as well as a school type, and as an outcome it can be delivered by other schools. Therefore, why do we not begin to look at the issue in a new and creative way, and to stop the, perhaps political, argument about a school saying that it cannot transform.
The council has one small school, which I will not name, in an area with a Protestant minority. That school felt that it could not transform, but wanted to embrace integration. It has now changed its board of governors and been accepted into membership of the council, although it is not a transformed school. We accept that what that school does is integrated education. That is the sort of creativity that can take place when people engage. However, we do not want schools coming to us as a last choice, because that delivers precisely the angst in the Protestant community, and among the transferors, that you have outlined.
The Chairperson:
Before opening the discussion to members, I will ask one final question about the assurances that the council would need about the right of boards of governors to hire and fire. What would be the nature of those assurances?
Ms McAlpine:
The issue is more about the right to recruit and so forth being retained in the particular board of governors rather than being overseen by the ESA, and being second-guessed, for want of a better expression, by the ESA. That is linked to the ability to recruit someone who is committed to the principles of integrated education, and who will, therefore, be working in that context with children in the classroom.
Mr Wardlow:
It is like the situation with the teachers’ appointment committee. We do not want to get into a situation of having three principals and saying, “Take your pick.” We want to retain the autonomy of all boards of governors to hire and fire staff. If the ESA becomes the employing authority in the sense of holding the conditions of contract and ensuring that that contract is carried through and that equity and the legal requirements are maintained, we do not want it being able to oversee or second-guess whether a teacher is dismissed, moved or suspended. That right should be retained by the local school.
Mr D Bradley:
Good morning. Mention was made of the lack of reference in the Bill to good relations or community relations, but clause 2 states:
“It shall be the duty of ESA (so far as its powers extend)—
(a) to contribute towards the spiritual, moral, cultural, social, intellectual and physical development of children”.
Does that not imply that if children develop in that way, they would be well-disposed towards good relations with each other and with other communities?
Mr Wardlow:
If I may reflect Duncan Morrow’s words: we have shopped with each other for years and we still do not like each other. Simply because we are together does not necessarily guarantee any outcome.
It is important that the approach is holistic in body, mind and spirit, and we welcome that. Our fear is that the absence of a mention of good relations or community relations will mean that they will not be seen in the DNA.
I am reflecting reality. We fear that the shared and better future is being neglected. For instance, a report on the cost of division was produced by Deloitte, but it seems to have gone; ‘A Shared Future’ seems to have gone; the 30 recommendations in the Bain Report on sharing seem to have gone. I am no longer sure what our thinking on a shared and better future is.
I hear people say that if jobs are brought in, our problems might go away. That is trite. We must address the past and consider how good community relations can be built. It is not just about Protestants and Catholics; it is about people of mixed race and other faiths; and about the 14% of people in the North or Northern Ireland who, in the most recent census, said that they were not Christians. They do not want to be labelled Protestant or Catholic; we have a duty to ask what community cohesion looks like.
If it is not mentioned, Dominic, I am afraid that it will go subterranean.
Mr D Bradley:
Would clause 2 be the appropriate place for its inclusion?
Mr Wardlow:
A possible solution would be to include a provision such as “and to promote a culture of tolerance”. There are ways of including a form of words; if you like, we will come back to you with a suggestion.
Mr D Bradley:
Paragraph 3 of you submission states that:
“In our view the support for schools cannot be fragmented and so we would ask that this area of ESA’s work is carried out to the benefit of all schools of all sectors, in a way that uses existing expertise and experience to the best impact. This may be best facilitated through buying in of existing expertise.”
How would that be facilitated? People usually buy in expertise if they are unhappy with the existing expertise. There seems to be a contradiction. For instance, one of the arguments that the voluntary grammar schools use in defence of the voluntary principle is that, through it, they can buy in better expertise, as they see it, than is available through the curriculum advisory and support services (CASS) if they are not happy with existing expertise — and they claim that they have not been in the past.
Ms Donnelly:
I do not think that it is a case of their being dissatisfied; rather, it is a case of CASS not being geared to deliver the type of support necessary for ethos development in integrated schools. I can only speak for the expertise provided by NICIE, which is geared towards developing teacher skills for education for diversity, and I referred earlier to the opportunity to extend that to all teachers. If we continue down the road of greater collaboration and partnerships, teachers will find themselves in more diverse settings for which they are not prepared; they do not have the skills to deliver meaningful education in a diverse environment. We encounter many teachers who are enthusiastic about their work; they want to make a difference, but they do not have the skills to raise or manage sensitive or contentious issues or manage diversity in their classrooms because they do not have the required training.
That is what I think is meant by expertise; I do not think that it referred to a dissatisfaction with CASS. CASS does a good job in supporting curriculum development but not ethos development.
Mr Wardlow:
The evidence for Frances’s statement is not simply anecdotal. Interesting reflections arose from research that was carried out at Queen’s University as part of the shared education project. Teachers said that they had not realised that collaboration was so hard; they were not prepared for it and had not been trained for it. It is an education to read the report from the teachers and governors of schools that engaged in collaboration. They had significant sums of money to help them, but, almost to a school, they said that they had not realised that getting together would be so hard.
Now is a good opportunity to stop fragmentation and to say that if expertise exists in other places, we should use it. For instance, we run validated training courses that are attended by Police Service officials, youth workers and teachers. They journey together over weekends in training, and they gain an Open College Network (OCN) qualification in diversity. We do not need to reinvent the wheel. We are not alone; many people do this. This is a good time to look at the available training and at how we can make best use of it rather than reinventing the wheel.
Mr D Bradley:
If schools need that service, surely it should be provided by the support and back-up services of the ESA.
Mr Wardlow:
The ESA could outsource that function. Why not do that rather than have the ESA duplicate the function? It is common for Departments to outsource. They can often outsource cheaply because it may be only for a limited period or because the salaries of the people delivering the service may be different from those of civil servants. Let us look at value for money, and let us explore how the ESA can provide the function without having everything at the centre. One way of doing that may be to outsource our work collegiately or in partnership with other bodies.
Mr D Bradley:
Are you not in danger of diluting the economies of scale that the ESA is supposed to achieve and through which savings are to be created?
Mr Wardlow:
It depends on how it is done. There may be duplication if there is a centre from which spokes fly out all over the place. However, surely the ESA’s entire purpose is not to do everything itself. Its purpose is partly to co-ordinate; otherwise, the ESA would provide ethos support. We are simply saying that there should be an assessment of how training can be done. On one hand, most of it could be done centrally by people being co-opted or seconded to the ESA; on the other, people who are already carrying out training may be outsourced to continue doing it.
Mr Elliott:
Thank you for your presentation. It was good to hear your arguments, even though I may not necessarily agree with all of them. Michael, you talked about the different sectors and mentioned the Protestant and Catholic sectors. Do you classify one education sector as the Protestant sector?
Mr Wardlow:
No; absolutely not. I will read the minutes of the meeting, but I am sure that I did not say that; if I did, I was wrong. I think that I said “controlled”, but let me clarify. We understand that there is a Catholic maintained sector, a controlled sector that is majority Protestant, an integrated sector, an Irish-medium sector and other sectors such as freestanding Christian schools, special schools and so on. I apologise if that —
Mr Elliott:
Thank you for that clarification. Ethos was mentioned a couple of times in your presentation. How is the ethos of integrated education different from that of the controlled sector? I have visited integrated schools, and I wonder how and where you see a difference from controlled schools.
Mr Wardlow:
The first thing is the forensic side, which is the general understanding that any school that is moving towards sharing, whether it is controlled or grant-maintained, will embrace an integrated ethos; that is partly supported by the mechanisms in the school. The management board and the teaching staff will reflect the two traditions as much as they can, and the boards of governors will certainly do that. The student intake will include a minimum of 30% of the minority tradition; other schools do not have the ability or right to ensure that. The forensic element means that a pupil is unlikely to be in a classroom in which he or she is in a minority of less than 30%.
Mr Elliott:
Just because boards of governors reflect the two traditions does not mean that the school and its teachers will reflect them.
Mr Wardlow:
That is the forensic side or the skeleton. Being born in McDonald’s does not make you a hamburger. In the same way, something will not happen just because people of different traditions sit around a table.
The second element is how a school’s policies reflect our respective traditions. In many integrated schools, young people are involved in the writing of policies on issues such as discipline, uniform, flags and emblems. Young people and parents have a right to be, and are, involved in helping to develop those policies. A school’s ethos is, in many ways, set by the visual nature of the school, and parents and children from integrated schools have a huge democratic buy-in on the school’s name, badge and other visual aspects.
The third thing is additional curricular activities. Children who have never played traditional British or Irish sports or studied the Ulster-Scots or Irish languages are open to new opportunities. Those activities are often contained in the hidden or added curriculum. The last thing is a wider promotion of integration. People ask about the difference between a maths class in an integrated school and one in a non-integrated school. It is not that a teacher says that one number is Catholic and another number is Protestant, although someone once made that joke to us; it is about respect, and that should be the same in every school. I do not disagree with you, but when those things are added together —
Mr Elliott:
Are you saying that that is not the case in every school?
Mr Wardlow:
No; not at all. It is not simply because we want people to love one another — that is not true — however, we are openly and avowedly anti-sectarian. Our teachers are trained to deal with contentious issues, not to hide them. It is our experience that, in some schools that have transformed to integrated status, that was not what they did before. Many teachers say that that is not the reason that they are in education, and there is an argument that that may be the case. However, we are saying that we will deal with hard issues openly. Those are not just Protestant/Catholic issues; there are issues about how language and identity are viewed.
It is the amalgam of how a school is constructed, its student intake, policies and hidden curriculum; its atmosphere is also a factor. Our ethos support will share models of good practice; how to teach in and construct a classroom and how to allow parents’ and pupils’ voices to be heard. It is all those things. I cannot write you an integrated formula, because I have 62 of them. However, at the core of our schools is a belief that difference should be out in the open and discussed.
Mr Elliott:
Like most members, I am aware of controlled schools that have sizeable mixed religion and race cohorts. One controlled school in my constituency now probably has a majority of non-locals; it manages and is developing extremely well. Therefore, could the ESA bring the integrated sector into the controlled sector?
Mr Wardlow:
No. In 1921, Lord Londonderry made a suggestion that politicians and Church leaders did not accept. We cannot turn the clock back and say that there should be one form of school. Whether we like it or not, the majority on the boards of governors of controlled schools is from a Protestant tradition. That has a certain perception for non-Protestants, not just for Catholics but for other children.
Mr Elliott:
It does not stop schools in many areas attracting many from the Roman Catholic tradition.
Mr Wardlow:
Absolutely not — I do not disagree with you; I am simply saying that it is a question of perceptions. Some controlled schools that we work with say that they do not want to become controlled-integrated; they feel that there is a loss of Protestantism and, some have said, too much movement towards greenness. When we investigate it, part of it stems from a lack of a consistent, thoroughgoing Protestant ethos and identity — there is not one. There are 106 Protestant denominations in the North of Ireland or Northern Ireland and one Catholic one, so how do we say what a Protestant ethos is? The transferors struggle with that, and they have issued an ethos document. We are very comfortable to work with schools, such as the school I talked about earlier, which was a controlled school that wants to become integrated but which does not want to transform; it is delivering an integrated outcome.
Therefore, I agree with you. The more shared education we have, whether it is called integrated or not, the better. We are not here to make a pitch for forced integration; it did not work in America; we are for voluntarism. However, the problem is that there is not equality of outcome.
Ms Donnelly:
Michael mentioned the Kitemark, or charter mark, on which we are working. It is notoriously difficult to describe what is meant by ethos: sometimes it is a feeling that a person gets when they go through a school’s doors. The Kitemark is an attempt by our sector to define what an integrated school looks like and how it manifests its ethos. We have arrived at a Kitemark, which we are piloting. However, that is not exclusive to the integrated sector. As Michael said, if schools with mixed enrolments feel that they can achieve the Kitemark, they can do so without having to hang the title “integrated” on the school gates. We hope to work with many schools in future that can show that the high-quality education that they provide and which every child deserves is integrated.
Mr O’Dowd:
Thank you for your presentation. You talked about the need for a shared future and a shared society, but you said that it is not a good idea that elected politicians be the majority on the ESA. If this society is to move forward — and I think that it is moving forward — we politicians must learn to work together, and we have done that successfully and have shown leadership. Why should we not form the majority on a board that will direct the second-largest budget in our society?
Mr Wardlow:
You asked a direct question, and I will answer you frankly. Four of the nine governors of the board of governors of a controlled school come from the Churches; churchmen may not have a majority, but that does not mean that they do not have influence. We would be happy for a large minority of politicians to be on the membership of the ESA, as we believe that that would send out the best message. However, politicians should not form the majority of members. I am responding frankly to you, John.
We have supported devolved government from day one. Even a few years ago, people would not have believed what is happening in Northern Ireland today; it is a privilege to be here in a joint group. However, perhaps it could create a certain suspicion among people about the new organisation if a majority of its members were politicians; people might question the democracy behind that decision.
A gesture by politicians to agree to take four of the nine seats would not be wasted. We do not want politicians to be absent; however, at the present time it could send out the wrong message if they were to dominate the new body; although we could be mistaken.
Mr O’Dowd:
It could send out the wrong message to dismiss politicians in such a manner; it suggests that they are not to be trusted with education or health. Society elects or does not elect its politicians; therefore if we are to democratise society, they have to be involved in all sectors — although not, of course, to the exclusion of others. There is a question mark over the proposed number of people on the ESA; we must see whether the ESA can be broadened to include other sectors. We will agree to disagree on that.
I found your comment on the educational advisory forum and the participation of young people on it interesting. You said that NICIE has young people involved — I am sorry; have I misinterpreted you?
Mr Wardlow:
It is not NICIE; it is the Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People.
Mr O’Dowd:
Have you thought through how young people will be involved in the forum? How will you work that out?
Mr Wardlow:
My background is in youth work, and I have worked in several countries. Everywhere that I have worked, I have had to speak on behalf of young people, even though I am no longer a young person. That might have passed you by, but it is the case. [Laughter.]
Young people have the right to be consulted on everything that affects them; they have a right not only to have their voice heard, but to have it demonstrated to them how their views are dealt with. It does not mean that you have to do what they say, but you have to tell them: this is what we heard you say; this is why we did it or why we did not do it, and we will continue to engage with you.
There are various ways of doing that. For example, one of our schools has two young people on its board of governors; they sit in on the first hour of meetings and take part in everything that happens. Young people are involved in the appointment of the Commissioner for Children and Young People; and they are involved now in the appointment of many youth workers across Northern Ireland. To claim to know what young people want and to speak on their behalf is not fair; the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child does not allow it. Tokenism is also wrong. To stick two young people on a board simply because you can tick a box is also wrong. That needs to be thought through.
More important is the process by which young people are consulted on policy matters. It is less important if they are on the board than that they are fully consulted and that their voice is not only heard but listened to and acted on in every policy imperative. That applies even to young children. Queens’s University has shown that one can deal with children as young as four years of age to find out what they think and how they act. Talking to young people would help us to make progress in the debate on what should be done at 11 years of age. I have no simple answer for you, John, but we need a mechanism for doing that.
Mrs M Bradley:
Paragraph 4 of your letter of 20 February refers to clause 16, “ESA to pay capital grants to voluntary and grant-maintained integrated schools”. You say that:
“We would hope that by this transfer, all schools will now be treated equally in terms of capital build and estate provision.”
Did you find that integrated schools were not treated in the same way as other schools?
Mr Wardlow:
Absolutely. I say that because of the nature of the development of integrated schools, not that the Department acted inequitably towards us.
The Department has a statutory role to encourage and facilitate, and that is fulfilled by our working with parent groups or with transforming schools. A new integrated school is not allowed any capital development until it proves that it is viable; in other words, until it meets the criteria. That can take up to five years. To get to that stage, we need to borrow money from the bank to buy the site and to put mobile classrooms on it; in any one year that can cost us £20 million. That is not Government money; we take the risk, as a charity, for that, and our sister organisation provides a guarantee. That does not happen anywhere else, and it is the nature of how integrated schools react and come out of the woodwork. I agree with Mervyn on that point. It is a patchwork approach, and it cannot continue.
If we were to consider the type of provision that we would like in Antrim, for example, we could do it through area-based planning and deliberation, which would involve a five- to 10-year plan during which time existing schools could be transformed. I am using that as a broad term to deal with the number of student places in response to what that local community would like available for it. It would remove the need to build ad hoc schools or to fill spaces with mobile classrooms. Unfortunately, that is where we are coming from, and it is more a criticism of the lack of planning for integration rather than the Government deliberately treating us unequally.
The Chairperson:
Is club banking unfair and unequitable?
Mr Wardlow:
Yes. The accounting officer of a small charity should never have had to carry £20 million of borrowing every year.
The Chairperson:
Thank you very much for your presentations; they were very useful. You are welcome to stay for the Department’s response; we can make it available to you before you leave.
Mr Wardlow:
Thank you very much. All the best for the rest of the day.
The Chairperson:
We will move on to the presentation from Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta (CnaG). Good morning, gentlemen; you are very welcome. Please make your presentation to the Committee and then members will ask you questions on it.
Mr Caoimhín Ó Peatáin (Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta):
I am the vice-chairman of Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta. On behalf of the comhairle, I thank the Committee for the invitation to make a submission. I introduce Liam Mac Giolla Mheana, who is one of our senior education officers; and Seán Ó Coinn, who is our chief executive. Seán will make our presentation this morning.
Mr Seán Ó Coinn (Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta):
I want to offer apologies from Dr Mícheál Ó Duibh, who is our senior development officer. He is sick and is unable to be here today.
Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta is very supportive of the ESA; it is a very good idea and is a considerable opportunity for the education system in the North. Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta seeks several amendments to the Bill to effect parity of treatment for the Irish-medium sector with other educational sectors. The changes primarily relate to elements of the Bill that we feel may weaken the linguistic ethos of Irish-medium schools. By ethos, we mean aspects of Irish-medium provision that encourage the use of Irish among pupils, thereby facilitating their acquisition of the language. More than 90% of children in Irish-medium schools come from non-Irish-speaking backgrounds.
We also seek to use the Education Bill to strengthen aspects of Irish-medium provision that, we feel, are poorly catered for in existing legislation.
In immersion education pupils are educated through a second or additional language; in our case that is Irish. Immersion education is an internationally recognised methodology and has been proven beyond doubt by respected educationalists to provide pupils with significant educational benefits in numeracy, science and literacy in their first and second languages, as well as offering them the opportunity to acquire their additional language. Those benefits are achieved through pupils being given access to a strong second-language ethos in their schools. A weakening of that linguistic ethos could have a negative effect on the educational benefits, including — although not exclusively so — the children’s acquisition of Irish.
Our first proposed amendment is to include a reference to Irish-medium education in clause 2, as that clause deals with the functions and general duties of the ESA concerning its role in providing support for Irish-medium education,. The Belfast Agreement refers specifically to the role of the Department of Education in respect of Irish-medium education, and it is important that that duty be reflected in the duties of the agencies of the Department of Education. In this case, we propose to bring most of the agencies of the Department under the umbrella of the ESA, and it is important that that duty be reflected there.
Our second proposed amendment relates to submitting authorities. We seek an amendment that will recognise the Irish-medium trustees as a submitting authority for the purposes of the submission of schemes of management and employment. According to that amendment, Irish-medium trustees would have a definitive role in approving schemes of management and employment in line with provisions in the Bill for the Catholic trustees.
The Bill acknowledges subsidiary roles to which the ESA must have regard in the discharge of its function, and it mentions areas such as the needs of industry, economy, society and the professions. We seek an amendment to require the ESA to have regard for the needs of Irish-medium pupils to be facilitated to use Irish in society beyond the confines of their schools.
We seek an amendment to the ESA’s role in appointing governors. We propose that a requirement be placed on the ESA to have regard to the commitment of governor appointees to the maintenance of the Irish-medium ethos of Irish-medium schools and of Irish-medium units in English-medium schools. That provision already exists for the integrated sector and the controlled sector, whereby education and library boards are required to ensure that the people that they nominate to the boards of governors of those schools are committed to the schools’ ethos. That is contained in the Education Reform (Northern Ireland) Order 1989, and such a rule relating to the Irish-medium sector should be included in the Education Bill.
We seek an amendment that will give a clear definition of what constitutes Irish-medium provision in a school and in part of a school. “Part of a school” is how an Irish-medium unit in an English-medium school is referred to in current legislation. The current definition of Irish-medium education is used for curricular purposes only and is ambiguous. We propose a definition in the Education Bill to allow for a designation of a school as an Irish-medium school or as a unit as part of a school by means of a scheme, for the purpose of education Orders, as well as for curricular purposes.
Representatives of the Irish-medium sector do not currently have a right to be consulted on development proposals that pertain to Irish-medium schools. However, those who represent, for example, the Catholic sector have a right to be consulted. We want an amendment that, in the interests of contributing to a strategic and effective approach to the future development of Irish-medium education, creates a right for representatives of the Irish-medium sector to be consulted on development proposals. Such a right would be similar to rights that Catholic trustees currently enjoy in existing legislation.
Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta is eager for its staff to be treated equally in relation to the likely impact of the review of public administration (RPA) on their employment. We are concerned that, because of the revised financial arrangements, staff will not have access to the same redeployment opportunities that arise from the development of the ESA that staff in other organisations will enjoy. Given that Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta is not a statutory body, we understand the significant difficulty in legislating for such provision in the Bill. However, we ask the Committee for its support to ensure that CnaG staff are treated on a par with staff in other organisations in that regard.
The Chairperson:
I will begin by asking the same question that I asked the representatives from the Northern Ireland Council for Integrated Education. Other sectors in the diverse educational provision in Northern Ireland would consider the position of the Irish-medium and integrated sectors to be advantageous and privileged because of the duty to facilitate under the 1989 Order and the terms of the Belfast Agreement. Would a change that places all education providers on a par be detrimental to the promotion and protection of educating children in the Irish medium?
Mr Ó Coinn:
One of the reasons that the Irish-medium sector is mentioned in the Belfast Agreement is because Irish-medium education is significantly underdeveloped in the North and parental access to it is limited. In large swathes of the North, parents have no access to any level of Irish-medium education. In most areas, they have no access to post-primary Irish-medium education. Therefore, it is important that an organisation such as ours is facilitated to encourage and assist parents to access Irish-medium education.
Apart from, perhaps, the integrated sector, that job is unnecessary in other sectors. It certainly is unnecessary in the controlled sector and the Catholic maintained sector, which have well-developed networks of provision throughout the North. For that reason, it is important that Irish-medium education is treated differently to other sectors so that we are allowed to continue to help parents to access Irish-medium education.
The Chairperson:
I want to ask a question that does not specifically relate to the Bill, and you can provide one answer. This is the first time that you have visited the Committee when I have been present. The Education and Training Inspectorate’s ‘Chief Inspector’s Report 2006-2008’ highlighted the slowdown in growth in the sector in the past number of years. Has your organisation responded to the chief inspector’s report, which raised several issues on standards and provisions that concerned people who have an interest in education? The chief inspector specifically mentioned the slowdown in growth, which he interpreted more as consolidation. That is not directly related to the Bill, but with regard to how the Committee looks at the future provision of education in Northern Ireland, it is important for us to have some understanding about whether you feel that that was an accurate reflection of the sector.
Mr Ó Coinn:
We think that it was, and we are very encouraged by many of the comments in the chief inspector’s report, particularly those about the achievements of young people. Recent statistics show that young people in Irish-medium education are achieving at least as well as, and in most cases better than, children in the English-medium sector in English and maths at level 5.
The consolidation is more by design rather than through a slowdown in demand in that a young sector such as ours recognises the importance of consolidation and of not running too far ahead of ourselves. It is important that the system is allowed to keep pace with the need for development. The chief inspector’s report mentioned the issue of leadership in our schools, and we recognise that. Most of the teachers in the Irish-medium sector who are available to become principals and vice-principals are very young, because it has been only a few years since people started to train to become teachers in the sector.
That is a growing pain of which we are conscious, and we will look to the ESA to support Irish-medium schools in those areas where we are experiencing growing pains as a result of the young age of our sector and our stage of development. We certainly hope and recognise that as our teachers get older and acquire more experience, those issues will gradually work their way out of the system.
The Chairperson:
You refer to the ESA’s duty to encourage and facilitate the development of Irish-medium education. What else do you feel needs to be in clause 2 to enhance what is being done in the sector, or to do more than is being done?
Mr Ó Coinn:
We would like the clause to have the wording that there is a duty by proxy, so to speak, on the ESA to encourage and facilitate the development of Irish-medium education. The main reason for saying that is because, in the current system, there is no duty on agencies of the Department to encourage, facilitate or support Irish-medium education. Agencies such as the education and library boards do so through departmental funding that is earmarked for that purpose. That is an unhealthy situation to be in as we move to the introduction of the ESA.
We would like to see whatever funding is allocated to the ESA making provision for all the children in its care, and that would include the Irish-medium sector as an integral part of the whole education edifice. That sector is entitled, as of right, to provision from the ESA as part of its core functions, rather than to be set aside for earmarked funding from the Department.
Mr D Bradley:
Maidin mhaith daoibh, agus tá fáilte romhaibh. Go raibh maith agaibh as an chur i láthair a rinne sibh. Tá cúpla ceist agam le cur oraibh. You are very welcome. I have a few questions, the first of which continues with the point that the Chairperson raised. Was it the experience of Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta in the past that as policies emerged from the Department and its agencies, cognisance was not being taken of Irish-medium education?
Mr Ó Peatáin:
Some years ago, like yourself, I worked as a seconded teacher with the boards, at a time when Irish-medium education was at a very young stage. My experience was that certain board officers found that that form of education was something new to them — it had not been budgeted for and the boards did not have specific personnel to deal with it. Consequently, they found it very difficult to cope with.
Schemes that the Department put in place were short term: a teacher was seconded for a year, perhaps two, to carry out a scheme. When the funding ran out and the scheme finished, the schools were left on their own. Sometimes the scheme was never properly wound up. Any work was very much carried out on an ad hoc basis. Our argument is that if that work were part of the ESA’s duties from the outset, it would be a new start, and it would create a much happier situation than has existed in the past.
Mr D Bradley:
One of your major concerns relates to promoting, maintaining and protecting the ethos of Irish-medium schools, and you have several proposals for doing that. One proposal is that the trustees of an Irish-medium school should be given the power to act as a submitting authority, comparable with the arrangement in the Catholic maintained sector. We put some of those ideas to the Department, and its officials said that such an amendment would have little effect, since, in most cases, the trustees and the boards of governors of Irish-medium schools are one and the same group.
Mr Ó Coinn:
That is not the case in so far as Irish-medium trustees, as with trustees in other sectors, have nominating rights to boards of governors. We feel that the trustees of the Irish-medium sector, as with the trustees of any sector, are guardians of the type of education in their sector. They have a particular role to play, and that role does not involve interfering with the running of a school: that is the job of the board of governors and the staff in the school. The role of the trustee is to ensure the long-term welfare of the type of education that has been established and the long-term welfare of the school.
Like the Catholic sector, we feel that it is appropriate that important documents, such as schemes of management and employment, reflect the ethos of the school — whatever ethos means. To us it means the characteristics of a school that encourage and support young people in using their Irish language in school and choosing to use their Irish language when they are not in school. That is a lay definition, but it is that type of thing that we are concerned about. Although it is not an immediate concern, we feel that situations could arise whereby boards of governors or principals could make decisions regarding that aspect of an Irish-medium school because of the exigencies that might exist at a particular time — whether for funding reasons or because of external issues — and that those decisions might be detrimental to the environment in the Irish-medium school. It is the role of the trustee to ensure that that does not happen.
I will give an example of something that happened recently. Some parents were concerned about the transfer issue and the fact that the new tests being developed by grammar schools would not be available in the Irish language, and they were placing pressure on Irish-medium principals to teach through English in year 7 so that the children would be familiar with answering questions in English. Thankfully, that has not happened, and both the Association for Quality Education and the Catholic Heads Association will be providing Irish-language versions of their tests.
However, principals and governors could be placed under a pressure that they are not able to sustain, and we feel that in such a scenario the role of the trustees is very significant and should therefore be recognised in our sector in the same way as it is recognised in the Catholic sector. It should also be recognised in the other sectors and with the transferors and controlled schools.
Mr D Bradley:
To continue on the theme of ethos, in some of the Department’s responses the Minister places great value on the ethos of all schools in all sectors. However, the departmental officials who have appeared before the Committee have told us that the ethos of a school or a sector cannot be precisely or easily defined and is therefore not appropriate for inclusion in legislation. They have said that the best vehicle for the protection, promotion and support of ethos is through the sectoral support bodies. Do you take issue with that, or do you see those bodies as being an appropriate means of protecting ethos?
Mr Ó Coinn:
Although we recognise that it is virtually impossible to come up with a legal definition of a specific ethos, we feel that the concept of ethos is definable and can be legislated for. However, we feel that the way to support ethos in schools is through a sectoral support body, and that it is important that the ethos is agreed by schools and is not imposed on them. Ethos should be developed through a sectoral support body that has the support of its schools and that reflects that support back to schools in helping them to define what ethos means for them and how to give effect to it. That body must ensure that, as schools and boards of governors change, the ethos is maintained and protected in schools. We feel strongly that there is an important role for bodies to be able to do that for a specific ethos.
We do not believe that any single body can support ethos throughout all sectors, because no schools in other sectors will want to create an environment whereby use of the Irish language is encouraged and children are encouraged to choose to use the Irish language outside the school as their means of communication with one another. We would not expect other schools to have that type of ethos, so therefore who else would be able to support schools in developing such an ethos other than a sectoral support body?
Mr Ó Peatáin:
The support mechanisms can be legislated for, and if they are in place, the chances are that the ethos will be in place. If they are not there, the ethos will not be there.
Mr D Bradley:
So you believe that not only is a sectoral support body needed to underpin the ethos, but those other amendments must be made, too.
Mr Ó Coinn:
The proposal is that the sectoral support bodies would be non-statutory bodies, just like Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta currently is. For that reason, our influence in Irish-medium schools is dependent on schools accepting that influence — they are not required to. However, people have rights in legislation, including the trustees of all schools. That is why we feel that as the bulwark against changes that might be detrimental to ethos, and so that ethos is not entirely dependent on the influence of a sectoral support body, other mechanisms must be built into the legislation to protect it. One such mechanism is the recognition of the Irish-medium trustees as having the same status as trustees in other sectors.
Mr Lunn:
The amendments that you have asked for are generally fairly specific. Judging by the response that we have had from the Department, you will be given a listening ear by the Minister on some of them. You seek an amendment that requires ESA to have regard to the needs of Irish-medium pupils to be facilitated to use their Irish in society in general, beyond schools. Is it realistic for the Education Bill to try to dictate what happens beyond the school?
Mr Ó Coinn:
The Bill already asks the ESA to have regard to a number of areas beyond the school in relation to industry, commerce and society in general. In that context, we also feel that the ESA should have regard to areas that are not specifically dealt with in the confines of school but that are well within the remit of education. Those include aspects such as youth provision, extended schools provision and areas in which schools have an interface with society and with the community. We seek an amendment for the ESA to have regard to the needs of Irish-medium children in society, which are different and additional to the needs of children who are being educated in the medium of English.
Mr Lunn:
You made a couple of points that are not mentioned in your written presentation. The presentation mentions that the Bill will require the ESA to have regard to the needs of industry and the economy, but those needs do not depend on the language through which pupils are taught; they depend on the curriculum and what they are being taught. I do not quite understand the connection.
Mr Ó Coinn:
The ESA will be required to have regard to certain needs other than its direct function, which is to support schools. Those needs include the needs of society, industry and the economy, and we seek an amendment for it also to be required to have regard to the needs of young people in using their Irish outside the context of the school. That is as legitimate an issue for the ESA to have regard to as its having regard to industry, commerce and society in general.
Mr Lunn:
I am not familiar with your medium, but do your pupils — particularly at primary level, where they seem to be more concentrated — use their Irish outside of school?
Mr Ó Coinn:
They do, of course.
Mr Lunn:
Do they use Irish in their normal play, conversation and social interaction?
Mr Ó Coinn:
That develops as the children’s proficiency develops and as they mature as young people. When young people have a choice between using the Irish language and the English language — for instance, when a number of Irish speakers are together — young people frequently use English. That is because of peer pressure or, perhaps, embarrassment. In addition to giving young people the skills to use Irish, Irish-medium education seeks to encourage young people to use their Irish so that it becomes part of their way of life. Ultimately, if they are lucky enough to marry and have children, those people will raise their children to speak Irish, and, in the longer term, that will contribute to the development of the number of people in society who speak the language.
Mr Lunn:
I am not hostile to what you are trying to do; in fact, I am very supportive of it. However, I still cannot think of what the wording would be of the amendment that you seek.
Mr Ó Coinn:
We have come up with a draft wording:
“and for the requirements of persons being educated through the medium of Irish.”
That amendment would be added to clause 26(1)(a), which contains two sub-paragraphs relating to the requirements that the ESA shall “have regard to”. We seek a third sub-paragraph, which would require the ESA to have regard to a person’s education through the medium of Irish so that the ESA is facilitated to support, for instance, youth provision for young people and the development of an economic awareness of the Irish-language economy among young Irish-medium pupils. That would require the ESA to recognise that there is a growing group of young people in the sector with needs that are specific and different from the needs of young people in English-medium education. For example, there is a growing Irish-language economy, North and South, and the ESA should have regard to that when interacting with young people in the Irish-medium sector.
Mr O’Dowd:
Fáilte romhaibh. The ethos issue has largely been covered, but some of your suggested amendments are avenues through which the concerns of the Catholic trustees, the Governing Bodies Association and the integrated sector can be answered, because many of the sectors that have appeared before the Committee are very concerned that their ethos is not protected in the Bill. It has already been commented on that it may be difficult to protect ethos in legislation, but the mechanisms to protect it may be easier sought out. Therefore, some of your suggestions would affect a number of sectors.
Will you outline your concerns about how staff who are employed by Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta will be protected in the transfer under the RPA?
Mr Ó Coinn:
A number of matters has been agreed with the Department of Education, one of which is that staff in Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta and in NICIE who are involved in the discharge of direct services to schools will transfer to the new authority. That is fine, but our concern is for the employees who are left behind when that transfer has taken place. We may not have the financial capacity to retain all those remaining employees because of the new funding arrangements for sectoral support bodies.
Therefore, the question is: what will happen to them? Compulsory redundancy payments will be available to them, in the same way as they will be available for all the other organisations. However, as we understand it, staff in all the other organisations will be able to enjoy the opportunity of redeployment to the ESA, as such opportunities arise, but when our sector achieves its new funding provision, we will have to make compulsory redundancies immediately. In that instance, those staff members will not have access to redeployment opportunities in the ESA.
Therefore, on 1 January 2010, and thereafter, employees of the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools, the Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment and the boards will have access to all the opportunities that are available in the ESA. Before the jobs go public, they will be advertised within the affected groups, as they are being called. However, employees in our sector will be made redundant. They will not have access to those jobs, unless they cannot be filled from within the affected groups. Therefore, employees will be treated just like any other member of the public who is seeking a job. They will have to wait until the jobs have been filled from within the pool before they can have access to them.
Our concern is that we are not being treated equally in that respect. We recognise that it is probably not something that can be covered in legislation. As far as we can gather, the matter is too complex. We are a non-statutory organisation, and this is about statutory organisations. However, we ask that the Committee supports parity of treatment for our employees.
Mr McCausland:
Thank you for your presentation. The Chairperson made a point earlier about the Belfast Agreement and the 1998 Order including a duty to encourage and facilitate the development of Irish-medium education. You then went on to explain that the outworking of that was the creation of your own organisation, which you see as a fulfilment of that.
In so far as there will be a support body, or whatever it may be called, for each of the sectors, that issue, in a sense, is resolved because there will be provision across the sectors. However, is the inclusion of a phrase that says that you encourage and facilitate the development of Irish-medium education in any way diminished and how would it be diminished? I was not clear on that point. If it were to say that it is the duty of the ESA to encourage and facilitate the development of all forms or all sectors of education, would that in any way take away from what you have?
Mr Ó Coinn:
I had not thought about it. My initial reaction is that it probably would not.
Mr McCausland:
It would address the issue of equality.
Mr Ó Coinn:
I appreciate that. The issue that we seek to address — although being novices to legislation we are not entirely sure how one might address it — is if the ESA, because it does not have ear-marked funding to support children in Irish-medium schools, decided not to do certain things. We want to ensure that such a situation cannot arise and that the Irish-medium child has the same esteem, parity and rights in the education system as children in English-medium schools and that that is enshrined in legislation. I suspect that ensuring parity for all children — including children in Irish-medium education — should cover our concerns.
Mr McCausland:
For many of us the issue is one of equality across sectors. Your point about something not being able to be done because money is not available happens in all sectors. If there were a form of words to create the same provisions for all sectors equally, that would be fine.
I was not clear on the point that Trevor Lunn made. Services outside the school were mentioned, including youth provision, which might or might not be outside the school; extended schools, which would be inside the schools; and awareness of the economy, although I would have thought that all schools would make children aware of economic opportunities. Apart from those three examples, which are probably provided for automatically, and certainly it is the responsibility of the school to make children aware of career opportunities — and you are right that there is an Irish-language economy in parts of Northern Ireland — how would you address issues outside the school?
Mr Ó Coinn:
It relates to the support and facilitation that the ESA would give to schools; for instance, to allow schools to make children aware of the economy and the needs of society. The ESA could do that without reference to the Irish-language economy, or perhaps in ignorance of the fact that there is an Irish-language economy; it would be appropriate to make such information available to children in Irish-medium schools. The ESA must have regard to issues other than the delivery of education — and we do not know why that was included in the Bill — therefore it should also have regard to the needs of Irish-medium children.
Mr McCausland:
Children in other sectors see opportunities for economic advancement or economic potential in other fields. Why do we need to specify one sector?
Mr Ó Coinn:
I presume that the default position would be that the ESA would have regard to the economy, commerce, employment and society in general through the medium of English. As the development of an Irish-language society and economy is relatively new and needs to be nurtured and supported, the danger is that the ESA might not have regard to it; and that its default position would be to have regard to those issues through the English language and that young people in the Irish-medium sector might be expected to benefit through English. However, they would not, because it would not be in the context of the available Irish-language opportunities.
Mr McCausland:
I would have thought that the most natural thing would be for the Irish-language economy to work with Irish-medium schools and the children in them and vice versa.
Mr Ó Coinn:
I agree with you. However, our difficulty is with the ESA. How would the ESA support that?
Mr McCausland:
How could the ESA support that? Is that not an issue for the schools?
Mr Ó Coinn:
I am not altogether sure what was envisaged when clause 26, which calls on the ESA in the discharge of its duties to have regard to the requirements of industry and commerce regarding education, was drafted. We felt that if the ESA is to have regard to society, commerce and the professions, it should also have regard to the needs of Irish-medium education and the children in it. I suppose that comes from experience, Nelson —
Mr McCausland:
Belt and braces.
Mr Ó Coinn:
It is not so much a question of belt and braces, but rather that we know what has happened in the past. Most of society and its agencies see education through the perspective of the English-medium sector — and why would they not? Most children are educated in that sector. However, a group of young people is emerging with specific needs, and we would like to ensure that they are included when we have an opportunity to develop a new education dispensation. It is a question of inclusion and of not leaving those children behind. We do not want to have to struggle with the ESA five or 10 years down the line to get it to recognise the needs of a group of young people when that could have been done at the outset.
Mr Ó Peatáin:
Youth and career services are often provided outside the school, and it is important that career advisers realise, for example, when working with an Irish-medium school that there is an Irish-medium economy. The careers services should be aware of that, and they would be more connected with the ESA than with individual schools.
Mr Mac Giolla Mheana:
I can think of two other examples: the Irish-language interface with libraries and the Irish-medium interface with health, which are significantly underdeveloped. We ask the ESA, in its interface with those agencies, to promote the needs of Irish-speaking children.
Mr McCausland:
As the Library Authority is a separate body, is it really the role of the ESA, which is under one Department, to start lobbying another Department?
Mr Mac Giolla Mheana:
Where the ESA interfaces with other public bodies —
Mr McCausland:
Where would that interface occur?
Mr Mac Giolla Mheana:
They would, I presume, meet the ESA about, for example, the deployment of speech and language therapists in schools. That comes under health, and the ESA would interact with the health services on that issue.
Mr McCausland:
Do you mean where those bodies provide services in Irish-medium schools?
Mr Mac Giolla Mheana:
Yes.
Mr McCausland:
How would that work with libraries?
Mr Mac Giolla Mheana:
Children in Irish-medium schools have specific needs and requirements, and the ESA should promote those needs and requirements with other agencies.
Mr Ó Coinn:
The Library Authority will be responsible for libraries and library services in schools.
Mr McCausland:
However, if another education sector, such as the Catholic maintained sector, has a Catholic ethos, would the job of the ESA be to promote a Catholic ethos with other bodies?
Mr Mac Giolla Mheana:
I do not think that we are talking about an ethos in the Irish-medium sector; we are talking about the ESA acting as a champion for services.
Mr McCausland:
Yes. However, equally someone could say that if the ESA is going to promote a Catholic ethos in Catholic schools because that is what the Catholic-maintained sector does, surely, we should be lobbying the libraries to ensure that there are more books about Catholicism. The situation could become bizarre. It is turning the ESA into something that it is not meant to be.
Mr Ó Coinn:
We are not asking for libraries, for instance, to have books about Irish-medium education and the promotion of Irish. However, we would ask that libraries have books in Irish about all aspects of society.
We do not want to use the ESA or libraries as a means of promoting Irish-medium education; we are happy that such Irish-language books are about any subject under the sun. However, we would like young people — particularly those whose parents perhaps cannot afford to buy books — to have access to books in Irish in community libraries and in Irish-medium schools.
Mr McCausland:
I will not pursue the point, but there is an issue about libraries for the Irish-language community to deal with; it is not the role of the ESA to start telling another body what to do.
Mr Ó Coinn:
I am not saying for a moment that the ESA should have such a role, but it should have regard to those issues. That is worded clearly in the legislation. The legislation does not say that that is a core duty and responsibility on the ESA; it is, however, something to which the ESA should have regard. The use of the phrase “have regard to” rather than “will have a duty to” or “is part of its functions” shows that it is of a subsidiary nature.
You are right; it will not be a core duty of the ESA, but we would like the ESA to discharge its duties with regard to the needs of children who are taught in the Irish-medium sector outside the confines of their classrooms and schools.
Mr McCausland:
Apart from libraries and health and social services, what other services would be affected?
Mr Ó Coinn:
We have already mentioned areas of work relating to youth and, in particular, career guidance.
Mr McCausland:
Is that it?
Mr Ó Coinn:
The point of the legislation is not to outline every detail of what will happen in the next five, 10 or 15 years. If, 15 or 20 years ago, teachers had been told that one of their pupils would be a web designer, they would have looked askance. My point is that we do not know what society holds for our young people in the next 10, 15 or 20 years. In facilitating the development of the young people in Irish-medium schools and as those young people leave those schools to enter society as, we hope, productive members, the ESA should have regard to their needs through the Irish language.
Mr Elliott:
Thank you for your presentation. I will not address you in Irish, because I do not know any. Forgive me for that. On one hand, it appears that you welcome the Education Bill and the idea of bringing all the education bodies under one umbrella organisation; yet you seek more independence in the ESA. For instance, you want an entitlement to delegate submitting authority to trustees as well as to boards of governors. Are you looking for the best of both worlds? There is no harm in that, but do you not think that such a request goes beyond the ideals of the ESA?
Mr Ó Coinn:
The Irish-medium sector, more than any other, stands to benefit from the development of the ESA and the support structures that the ESA will bring to all schools; Irish-medium schools should be an integral part of the ESA. As far as I understand, the legislation already allows for submitting authority to be with boards of governors. Our concern is that boards of governors are in office for only four years; they do not take a long-term view. We would like to have that responsibility vested in somebody who takes the long view of a school’s welfare.
Mr Elliott:
Is it up to the Irish-medium sector to decide whether submitting authority lies with the board of governors or with the trustees?
Mr Ó Coinn:
It should be up to the trustees to decide. They have been given a responsibility; they are the guardians of a school’s long-term welfare.
By “school” I do not mean a school building; I mean the provision in a school. We are not interested in school buildings; it is what happens in schools that is important. The trustees are the guardians of what happens in their schools in the long term. We do not want our schools to be independent of the ESA; we want them to be part of the ESA and to be supported by it —
Mr Elliott:
Do you seek independence of authority?
Mr Ó Coinn:
The only area in which we seek an influence for trustees — not for ourselves — is in the submission of schemes of employment and schemes of management. In most cases, we expect that role to be delegated to schools’ boards of governors; however, because of the involvement of trustees, certain aspects are common to all Irish-medium schools. Thereafter, those roles will be delegated to boards of governors, which will be responsible for the day-to-day management of a school in the context of those schemes. Therefore, the schemes will be concerned only with ensuring that — as far as possible — children can acquire and use Irish in school. It will not extend beyond that.
Mr B McCrea:
You said that you are novices in legislation; so am I — it is a learning experience. However, given the positive responses, you seem to have the ear of the Minister. Perhaps you can give the Committee some classes on that skill.
Mr D Bradley:
Through the medium of Irish, no doubt.
Mr B McCrea:
If that is what it takes, Dominic.
Mr D Bradley:
I will give you a couple of ceachtanna.
Mr B McCrea:
You said in your submission, Seán, that the ESA offers an opportunity. What problems with the current system will the ESA address?
Mr Ó Coinn:
Caoimhín said earlier that the present system has evolved over many years and has certain structures and systems in place. When Irish-medium education is introduced, it is difficult to adapt those systems to the needs of the Irish-medium sector. Over the years, a system has evolved whereby provision for the Irish-medium sector is achieved through additional funding from the Department and through agencies such as the education and library boards, CCEA, and so on. That is an unhealthy situation.
Mr Ó Peatáin:
It is an ad hoc system.
Mr B McCrea:
Will the ESA provide an opportunity to mainstream?
Mr Ó Peatáin:
Yes.
Mr B McCrea:
I have two or three straightforward questions. In response to Nelson, you said that you thought that the Irish-medium system would benefit from the ESA more than other sectors. Why would that be the case?
Mr Ó Peatáin:
It will bring Irish-medium education into the core of education provision and make it more mainstream.
Mr Ó Coinn:
We can do that in a planned way. To date, the education and library boards and CCEA have had to plan on the hop to deal with new Irish-medium schools, and they consider the needs of those schools and whether there is sufficient expertise in their respective organisations; if they do not have the necessary expertise, they must ask themselves how they will cope. We now have an opportunity to establish an organisation to plan for the inclusion of the Irish-medium sector to the same degree as all other sectors. Of course, the Irish-medium sector should not be treated better than other sectors, but it should be included in the planning.
Mr B McCrea:
What percentage of the school cohort — and you may tick whatever age group is convenient — do you anticipate will be educated in the Irish-medium sector? Your paper estimates that attendance will grow to between 8,000 and 10,000 over the next 10 years. What percentage is that of the school cohort?
Mr Ó Coinn:
Ideally, we feel that all children could benefit from being educated through the medium of Irish. It is hard to know what percentage, because in large areas of the North parents do not have access to Irish-medium education, and until parents have a mechanism for doing so we do not know whether they want Irish-medium education or not. However, it would be somewhere between 5% and 10% on the basis of those figures, depending on population trends over the next number of years.
Mr B McCrea:
That is an interesting figure, because I reckon that, even at the upper level, it is about 3%. There are about 300,000 people in education. My concern is the so-called tyranny of the minorities: we try to do everything for everybody and end up doing nothing for anybody.
You should try to understand and address Nelson’s point that what you say has implications elsewhere. Encouraging the use of Irish outside the school and expanding into youth services and libraries could place an obligation on the ESA to correspond with various bodies in Irish. Should the Health Service, for example, produce leaflets in Irish? That could cause concerns about costs. It would be helpful if you clarified the extent to which the state should engage in Irish. Nobody is saying that you should not have the opportunity, but it would be difficult if it were to become an obligation on the state. Do you understand my point?
Mr Ó Coinn:
I do. We are not so much concerned about obligations on the ESA to do certain things for the Irish language; rather we are concerned about what the ESA does to support the education of young people in Irish-medium schools. That may mean in some cases spending extra money, but we think that that is justifiable; it has to be reasonable and there is a limit to what we can expect; nevertheless, we feel that it is legitimate. It is not our function to decide what the ESA should do in relation to the Irish language and in corresponding with other organisations; our job is to ensure the welfare of the young people in our sector and to ensure that in whatever new systems may be developed our young people are not left behind.
When we talk about health, for example, we mean speech therapists who know how to deal with young people in an Irish-medium school who have speech difficulties. That is not to say that every speech therapist who goes into an Irish-medium school must be a fluent Irish speaker; it has nothing to do with that. It has to do with ensuring that the professionals who support our schools and who assist our young people know what Irish-medium education is and what immersion education — which is practised widely throughout the world — involves. It is about ensuring that they do not tell a parent or teacher that a child has speech difficulties because they are being educated through a second language. That has happened in the past, even though it has no foundation in any research or practice anywhere.
That is the purely anecdotal lay opinion of someone who does not understand the system. We are trying to ensure that such things do not happen when the ESA develops.
Mr B McCrea:
Given that the Committee is still taking evidence, it would help if, at some stage, you wrote a paper to explain what you are trying to do. At the risk of labouring the point, Tom Elliott highlighted the fact that every set of witnesses said that it broadly supports the ESA but that it wants this, that and the other sorted out. You are not dissimilar from them. Every group said that it likes the concept of the ESA but that it wants to be an employing authority to ensure that the ethos is right in its school —
Mr Ó Coinn:
No: we do not want to be an employing authority. We said that we want our trustees to be able to have certain things in the schemes of management and employment; however, that does not mean that we want our trustees to be an employing authority. Unlike other sectors, perhaps, we are happy that the ESA have the role of employing authority. We do not seek to ensure that curricular support, or any other support, for the Irish-medium sector sits outside the remit of the ESA; in fact, we have asked that curricular and teacher support be firmly located in the ESA. That is our wish, and we support the ESA in that context.
Mr B McCrea:
That explanation is useful; however, you have a job of work to do to flesh out fully for those of us who are not involved in Irish-medium education what exactly the limits are and what you want. We will also try to engage on that.
There is an issue of parental choice. Some people want their children to be educated in Irish-medium schools — which is fine — others want their children to be educated in schools with a Catholic ethos, and others want their children to be educated in an academic environment.
A problem exists in that some sectors are happy to support some forms of parental choice but not others. I do not want to put you in the hot seat, but it would be helpful if all sectors reflected on that point maturely and tried to assist everybody. Ours is a diverse society, and we should be able to find a way of giving everyone what they want, within the bounds of reason, and you have a contribution to make to that. I have tried my best to understand and participate, but you must help us, too, by giving us a balanced approach.
Mr Ó Coinn:
Perhaps we differ from the other sectors on the issue of new schools in that we are happy for Irish-medium provision to be developed in existing schools. We see no conflict between the Irish-medium ethos and the religious ethos — or whatever ethos a school may have.
We are working with the integrated sector to develop Irish-medium provision in one of its schools; we already have one controlled Irish-medium school and several Catholic maintained schools with Irish-medium units. We realise that we cannot build a new school in every town where parents want their children taught through the medium of Irish.
Mr B McCrea:
You do not have to answer this question, as time is moving on. Given the relative newness of your proposition to mainstream Irish-medium education, it strikes me that an opportunity exists for sectors to get together to reach common ground, not just with their immediate neighbours but with others. Mature, responsible educationalists should be able to come to some sort of compromise and guide us through.
You have a useful role to play in that. I will not detain you any longer.
The Chairperson:
Caoimhín, Seán and Liam, thank you very much for your presentation and for your submission. The Department has provided a response to your submission, which we will make available to you today to give you an idea of its thinking.
Mr Ó Peatáin:
Thank you, Mr Chairman.
The Chairperson:
I welcome Chris Stewart from the Department of Education to the Committee; members will have a copy of his submission. Perhaps Chris will give us a brief overview of the Department’s response, and members will ask him questions on it.
Mr Chris Stewart (Department of Education):
I am conscious of the pressure on the Committee’s time, so I will keep my presentation short.
Mr B McCrea:
You say that every week.
Mr Stewart:
Yes, and every week I fail to deliver on it; I am conscious of that. I will begin with a few points on NICIE’s submission and will move on to that of Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta. The Minister welcomes NICIE’s support for the reform of education administration, including the establishment of the ESA and the policy of sectoral support.
NICIE sought an assurance that boards of governors would continue to take the key decisions on the recruitment and dismissal of staff, and the Committee has discussed that issue several times. The Committee is familiar with the Department’s position, and I am happy to give NICIE the reassurance that is has sought on the role of boards of governors.
Clause 13 deals with training and advice and support, and NICIE referred to the potential role of sectoral bodies in providing those services to schools; they could perhaps be commissioned to do so by the ESA. The Committee is familiar with the Department’s position on that issue, as it was discussed at some length last week. It is the Department’s intention to have a mixed economy of services, involving the ESA and other providers. The aim of the policy is to ensure that it is a matter for the ESA, and particularly for schools, to determine how such services would best be procured.
NICIE called for the general duty on the Department to reflect more explicitly than at present the promotion of good relations. We understand and note NICIE’s views. However — and this will answer one of Michael Wardlow’s questions — existing duties, such as those in section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 and the duty on the Department to encourage and facilitate integrated education, continue to apply, as they remain on the statute book.
We note NICIE’s comments on the membership of the ESA; similar comments have been made by members and by other stakeholders. The Committee is familiar with the Department’s position and with the Minister’s willingness to consider the Committee’s views.
Michael Wardlow asked about the legislative provisions on transformation, and I hope that my answer will provide him with some clarity and reassurance: no significant changes are planned to those provisions. The necessary technical amendments are in the first Bill rather than in the second one; they simply reflect the changes in organisation and administrative arrangements.
The Minister welcomes the support of Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta for the reform of education administration, including the establishment of the ESA and its role as the employer of staff in grant-aided schools, and for the retention of youth services in education.
The Minister agrees with Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta that the ESA should have a statutory duty to encourage and facilitate Irish-medium education, and the Department will wish to consider how best that might be reflected in legislation. It is examining the options suggested by Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta.
Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta raised several points and made suggestions under the general heading of the ethos of Irish-medium schools and how it should be safeguarded and fostered. It was suggested that the submitting authority for schemes of management and schemes of employment for Irish-medium schools should be the trustees of the schools; other stakeholders have suggested a similar change. The Minister welcomes that suggestion and is already considering, as members will be aware, a change to the Bill that will produce the outcome sought by CnaG. The Department has found the explanation and clarification of the role of trustees of Irish-medium schools helpful.
The suggestion was made that clause 26(2) should include a reference to the needs of persons being educated in the Irish language. The Minister agrees that there is a need for such a change, but she will wish to consider further how it might best be reflected in legislation. The Department understood CnaG’s suggested amendment to clause 26(2) to refer specifically to curriculum and examination functions. However, the description that Seán and his colleagues gave this morning was somewhat broader, and therefore clause 26(2) might not be the appropriate home for such a provision. That is something that the Department will need to consider further.
It was suggested that there ought to be a formal definition for Irish-medium schools and a designation scheme similar to the approach in legislation to Catholic maintained schools. However, although the Minister has indicated that she supports each sector’s role in fostering and developing its ethos, we do not feel that the prescriptive legislative route is the appropriate vehicle for doing so. The definition of Catholic maintained school is not connected to ethos; it is merely a technical measure. It was originally needed to delineate the group of schools that were to be the responsibility of the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools (CCMS), and when CCMS is dissolved that definition will no longer be needed and will be removed from legislation.
However, two other aspects would provide the reassurance that CnaG seeks. First, any significant change to the character of a school, such as ceasing to provide education through the medium of Irish, would need a development proposal, and any person making such a proposal must first consult the board of governors, the teachers, the parents and the trustees of a school.
Secondly, the Department envisages the scope for a school’s scheme of management to include a requirement that a board of governors would not be permitted to make a significant change to the character of a school without the agreement of the submitting authority. That, taken with the possible amendment to the submitting authority provision, should provide the reassurance that CnaG seeks.
CnaG refers to provisions in existing legislation regarding the appointment and duties of governors of integrated schools. Those are referred to in the paper, and their focus is, by and large, on requiring governors to use their best endeavours to maintain the viability of schools as integrated schools. CnaG suggests the need for a similar provision for Irish-medium schools, and the Minister agrees that there is a strong case for doing so. We want to consider how best to take that forward.
CnaG asked for provisions to protect the terms and conditions of staff who transfer to the ESA as well as those who do not transfer. The Minister emphasises that any staff who transfer from CnaG to the ESA will have their terms and conditions of service and pension entitlement protected on the same basis as staff who transfer from statutory organisations. The Department understands why CnaG has asked for those commitments to be included in the Education Bill; however, as we explained previously, a difficulty stems from the fact that CnaG is a private, non-statutory organisation. The inclusion of the suggested provisions in the Bill could render it a hybrid Bill — a Bill that covers both private and public law matters.
The difficulty is that the Assembly does not yet have a separate procedure for dealing with hybrid Bills. There would therefore be a very high risk that the changes sought by CnaG would delay the Bill significantly, which would, in turn, delay the implementation timetable for the RPA. In those circumstances, the Minister concluded that the change should not be made, as it would involve considerable risk of delay to the Bill and to the implementation timetable of the RPA, with no additional benefit to CnaG staff.
Seán and his colleagues raised the issue of staff who might be at risk of redundancy. I want to reassure them that any staff in any RPA organisation at risk of redundancy would be regarded as part of the affected group, and therefore able to apply for jobs as they are brought forward for advertisement. We would, of course, want to work closely with CnaG, as with any organisation, to avoid compulsory redundancy if possible — and we are confident that that is possible.
CnaG has asked for provision to be made in the Bill to give the trustees of Irish-medium schools a statutory right to be consulted about development proposals in relation to Irish-medium education on a similar basis, as they put it, to Catholic trustees. CnaG’s paper suggests that, perhaps, it sees that as a collective role and gives a perception that the trustees of Catholic schools have such a collective role at present. However, the Education Bill does not, in fact, give such a collective role to Catholic trustees, nor indeed to trustees in any other sector.
Paragraph 9(4) of schedule 7 is the key provision in this respect, introducing as it does a new article 14 to the Education and Libraries (Northern Ireland) Order 1986 to deal with development proposals. Under proposed new article 14, the trustees of any school must be consulted about a development proposal that would affect the school. In those circumstances, the Department is satisfied that the Bill contains equitable provisions that ensure that the trustees of all schools in all sectors will be consulted on development proposals that will affect their schools.
We also suggest that the collective role that CnaG seeks might be more appropriately exercised in the area-based planning process. Proposals for the second education Bill, which we hope to bring before the Committee in a few weeks’ time, will include provisions for sectoral interests — and other interests such as pupils, parents, staff and governors — to input collectively to the area-based planning process.
Chairman, that was a quick gallop over the ground. I will stop now for questions.
The Chairperson:
Thank you, Chris. It is clear from your response to this morning’s presentations that the Department is considering amendments to clauses 2, 3, 26 and 31. When will the Committee see those proposed amendments? Time is marching on. Yesterday, we received a sizeable document from the Department with information on the Committee’s concerns; it also contained references to more information being presented shortly, and you mentioned earlier that we may have sight of the second Bill in a few weeks’ time. Documentation on the Bill will continue to increase. After all, it will not be a simple matter of bringing amendments to the Committee to be agreed on the nod; there will be deliberations on whether such proposed amendments are appropriate or have adequately addressed the Committee’s concerns.
Do you have an idea about the time frame for proposed amendments? We are marching through May, and summer recess will soon be upon us.
Mr Stewart:
You are quite right, Chairman; there is much still to get through. May I start by dampening your expectations on the second Bill?
The Chairperson:
Oh dear.
Mr Stewart:
I do not think that I will be in a position to bring you a full second Bill as quickly as you might wish. However, I hope, within the next few weeks, to give the Committee a fairly full description, derived from the drafting instructions, of the content of the second Bill, particularly on area-based planning. I think that a presentation on the policy on area-based planning is scheduled in the Committee’s work programme. We would like on the same day, if it is acceptable to the Committee, to give you a fairly full description of how the legislation on area-based planning might look. If possible, I would like to make draft clauses available to the Committee to give it as full a picture as possible.
We have what we hope is the definitive list of amendments to the first Bill, which the Department will put before the Minister for clearance; as soon as it has been cleared, we will make it available to the Committee. If it possible to have that ready for next week, we will do so, but I will not make any promises. We should certainly be able to make that list available to you within the next two weeks.
Mr McCausland:
I was interested that the representatives from the Irish-medium sector said that they had no difficulty with the duty to encourage and facilitate one particular sector or sectors being broadened to include all sectors. Are you currently looking at that issue?
(The Deputy Chairperson [Mr D Bradley] in the Chair)
Mr Stewart:
We are not actively looking at it; however, I suspect that we ought to, because it raises a number of interesting questions.
Mr McCausland:
What would those questions be?
Mr Stewart:
The question that occurs to me at this stage — and there may be many more — is what exactly the scope or focus of such a duty might be. We all have an understanding of what is meant by “sectors of education”, but converting that into something that can be captured in statute represents a particular challenge.
One can define Irish-medium education and integrated education fairly simply. However, once one moves beyond those to look at other types of education and schools, it becomes more of a challenge to provide meaningful definitions or descriptions. I am not saying that those challenges are insurmountable, but they need to be worked through very carefully to ensure that such a provision would be sufficiently clear and meaningful in the legislation.
Mr McCausland:
There was a concern that the folk running an Irish-medium school might attempt to change the ethos of the schools to something else. At present, schools can transform or change only from controlled status to integrated status. If we are going to reassure folk in the Irish-medium sector that their schools will not be changed into something else, and given that we already know that Catholic maintained schools cannot be changed because of their ownership arrangements, do you intend to include some provision in the Bill that will offer the same reassurance to schools in the controlled sector?
Mr Stewart:
If the provisions are carefully framed, we can achieve that effect for all sectors. From what CnaG and the Catholic trustees have said, it is clear that trustees, who take the longer-term view of the ethos of their particular schools or sectors, want to ensure that boards of governors, which by definition are more transient authorities, continue to have the proper regard for that ethos.
In an attempt to provide for that, we have suggested the concept of a submitting authority. If the legislation were suitably amended, such an arrangement would give trustees the opportunity to exercise a measure of control — and I use that word advisedly — over boards of governors in particular schools. We feel that a submitting authority is the vehicle that would allow us to do that without diluting or departing from the core principles of the RPA by setting up additional layers of bureaucracy or additional statutory authorities.
Once again, that probably raises particular challenges and requires a degree of creativity for controlled schools. However, if that can be done, and if the core principle is the same — to give those who will foster or be the guardians of the ethos of a particular sector the means of ensuring that boards of governors and schools continue to respect and operate in accordance with that ethos — that principle can be reflected for all schools.
(The Chairperson [Mr Storey] in the Chair)
Mr McCausland:
Would respect for the ethos of the school include not transferring it to a different ethos?
Mr Stewart:
Yes, that is a reasonable suggestion.
Mr McCausland:
Finally, the representatives of the Irish-medium sector raised an issue about the needs of Irish-medium pupils to be facilitated to use their Irish in society in general, beyond schools. What is your assessment of the propriety of that proposal, which some people might perceive as an intrusion into areas beyond the remit of the ESA?
Mr Stewart:
That is a difficult question for me to answer. To do so, I would have to consult with my policy colleagues who are more directly involved in Irish-medium education policy. The matter is beyond my sphere of competence within the RPA. From an RPA perspective, I think that the description of the aim of the suggested change takes it beyond the focus of the particular clause in the Education Bill that it seeks to amend.
Therefore, we perhaps need to discuss further with CnaG and, indeed, the Committee the intention behind the suggested amendment. If the amendment is more tightly focused around curriculum and examination matters, then, as the Minister has indicated, clause 26(2) may be the right place to do something and CnaG’s suggestion is along the right lines. If, however, the ambition is broader and intends to strengthen and underpin the role of the Irish language in society generally, clause 26(2) is not the right place for that proposal. Indeed, it may be that the Education Bill is not the right place for it.
Mr D Bradley:
Good afternoon, Chris. In its submission, NICIE said that the Bill does not mention good relations or community relations. You heard the NICIE representatives being asked whether they felt it appropriate to include that aspect in clause 2, which outlines the ESA’s duty:
“to contribute towards the spiritual, moral, cultural, social, intellectual and physical development of children”.
The Department’s response did not address that point. What is your view on that matter?
Mr Stewart:
I thought that I had addressed that matter; perhaps I was not clear enough. The Department understands the sentiment behind NICIE’s proposal but does not think that such an additional duty or reference is necessary, because the Department and, in due course, the ESA will be subject to section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998. People tend to remember the first half of section 75, which focuses on equality. However, it contains a second statutory duty that focuses specifically on good relations. That will apply to the Department and to the ESA. Therefore, the short answer is: such a duty already exists — or, in the case of the ESA, will apply to it soon.
Mr D Bradley:
Mr Wardlow’s point was that other policies, such as A Shared Future, have fallen by the wayside and that the only way to guarantee a movement towards the improvement of good relations and community relations is to mention it in the legislation specifically.
Mr Stewart:
Although policy documents such as A Shared Future — which I remember fondly from the days when I was involved in writing it — might evolve and change, the statutory duty in section 75, and, therefore, section 75 (2), will remain.
Mr D Bradley:
Will the Department at least consider NICIE’s point?
Mr Stewart:
At the Committee’s request, I am happy to ask the Minister again. However, our response today would be that we have considered the matter, and we politely disagree with NICIE.
Mr D Bradley:
Will you consider the point further?
Mr Stewart:
Yes.
Mr D Bradley:
Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta said that the trustees of Irish-medium schools should have the power to act as submitting authority. In your initial response, you said that the trustees and boards of governors of Irish-medium schools are one and the same and, therefore, the amendment would have little effect. Does the Department still hold that view?
Mr Stewart:
No; that was my understanding at the time. However, after subsequent conversations with Seán Ó Coinn — and he clarified the point today, helpfully — I appreciate that the trustees of Irish-medium schools, similar to those in Catholic schools, have a separate function and exist independently of boards of governors. Therefore, the suggested amendment is more valuable and could operate how CnaG wants it to. The Minister was minded to do that anyway, but CnaG’s helpful clarification means that it is more useful to the Irish-medium sector, too.
Mr Elliott:
Your response says:
“However, whilst the Minister is committed to supporting each sector in fostering and developing ethos, we do not feel that legislation is the appropriate vehicle for doing so”.
What is the appropriate vehicle?
Mr Stewart:
The appropriate vehicle is support for the sectoral bodies and their role. The Committee heard several times, particularly from the Governing Bodies Association and, to an extent, from the Catholic trustees, strong support for the voluntary concept in schools. What could be more voluntary than the ethos of a school or sector? Therefore, what could be more difficult to define, capture and underpin in legislation than ethos? We feel that the the correct approach is to be indirect and to equip, encourage and facilitate sectoral bodies in their role in fostering and developing ethos, rather than have the Department prescribe it.
Mr Elliott:
OK; that will do for now.