Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): Good afternoon, everybody. You are all very welcome. Chris, I feel like I have seen a lot of you in the past few days. Joining us today from the Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People (NICCY) are Chris Quinn, Children's Commissioner; Dr Arlene Robertson, policy and research officer; Maddison Blair, member of the NICCY youth panel — you are very welcome, and we look forward to hearing from you, Maddison; Rachel Woods, senior policy and research officer; and Joanne McGurk, head of legal and investigations.

It is a big panel, and our time is fairly short. I ask that, where possible, if one person is identified as appropriate to answer a particular question, we stick to that so that we can get through all the questions from members. I appreciate that there may be areas of crossover and we cannot be rigid on that, but I ask you to bear in mind that we have scheduled 30 to 40 minutes for this session. I will keep members right, but, at times, I may also have to keep the witnesses right and ask you to bring an answer to a conclusion. We have a big agenda today. We have your briefing paper. I am happy to hand over to you for any initial remarks or presentation. That should take up to 10 minutes, and then we will move into questions.

Mr Chris Quinn (Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People): Thank you, Chair. It is a pleasure to be here. I will skip past the introductions as you have already done that. I will pass straightaway to Maddison, who will set the scene from a NICCY perspective. I will then make a statement as well. Like you, I want to leave as much time as possible for colleagues to feed in.

Ms Maddison Blair (Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People): Thank you so much for having us here today. Relationships and sexuality education (RSE) is vital in preparing children and young people for life. It is necessary that they all receive that education, regardless of who they are or which school they go to.

Children and young people need to be taught about healthy relationships of all kinds. They need to be educated on what is acceptable and unacceptable behaviour. We need to ensure that children and young people, especially children who are in vulnerable circumstances, are able to determine that for themselves. To ensure that all young people are able to access the same information, parents should not be able to opt out of RSE for their children. That would help to protect children and young people by equipping them with the knowledge and tools to seek help when necessary.

During RSE, young people should be taught about their rights under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) in relation to the topics being discussed: for example, article 34, which is the right to be protected from sexual abuse. That would help to educate young people on their rights, whilst demonstrating examples of how those rights should be respected and what to do if they are not. Consent is a very important aspect of RSE, and the curriculum does not highlight it nearly enough. It is essential that children are taught about privacy and how to set clear boundaries. No means no, even for something as seemingly harmless as hugs. If a child is not comfortable, it does not matter how small the contact seems. Children need to know that they do not need to justify their refusal.

Students with special educational needs (SEN) are more vulnerable and, unfortunately, at more risk. It is essential that not only they but their peers receive sufficient RSE, so that they are able to have the conversations and know what to do if issues arise.

The curriculum should include all relevant scientific terms — for example, for body parts — because that is vital to ensuring that young people are confident in their bodies, and to removing any stigma, especially surrounding women's health. By expanding the vocabulary of children and young people, you promote open discussions between them, thus helping to improve their communication skills in all the relationships that they are and will be part of. When I was fortunate enough to receive RSE in primary school, we were separated by gender. That had the opposite effect to what was intended. It made us feel scared to talk about our bodies. That was especially the case for the girls, who, to this day, use myriad euphemisms for their period simply because they are too embarrassed to discuss it freely. Introducing RSE from an early age will promote healthy discussions about bodily autonomy and help to foster healthy relationships between young people.

RSE should take into account the impact of social media with regard to the spread of misinformation. It should combat that by ensuring that all young people are given scientifically accurate information. It is easy to fall into traps online. That is clear through the influence of individuals such as Andrew Tate, who grew a large fan base of young boys by spreading false, misogynistic information and promoting toxic masculinity. Young people should be taught how to identify misinformation to prevent the rise of similar content creators. That would also be in line with the new ending violence against women and girls (EVAWG) strategy.

On social media platforms, especially TikTok, it is often hard to avoid sexual content and/or inaccurate information regarding sexual relationships and health. On more than one occasion, I, as a young person, have fallen victim to the algorithm promoting that kind of content, despite my best efforts to block harmful content. It is important that sections of the RSE curriculum regarding social media are updated frequently to keep up with the constantly changing terminology used online. Many videos on TikTok are captioned using cryptic phrases — such as, "My shampoo and conditioner ran out on the same day" for a video that is actually about suicide. It is incredibly important that young people are taught how to identify possible hidden meanings within social media posts to prevent them from accidentally sharing or promoting harmful and/or inappropriate content that contains information contradictory to that in the RSE curriculum. Young people need to access information that will benefit them, so it is essential that there are no barriers to them receiving accurate and comprehensive RSE.

Mr Quinn: Thank you, Maddison, and really well done. I will have trouble following that.

In preparation for this meeting, we, as a team in NICCY, discussed our experiences of RSE, and we found that they were all very different. I would make an assumption that the people in this room have a similar diversity of experience of RSE. This issue is not new. I have been working with children and young people for about 30 years, and I remember campaigns by the UK Youth Parliament, the Secondary Students' Union of Northern Ireland (SSUNI), the Northern Ireland Youth Forum and others calling for a curriculum for life, and specifically for RSE to be taught as part of the curriculum.

Given that I was here about six months ago talking about our statutory role and remit, I will not go back over that. I am aware that the Committee is very well informed on the background and policy context of RSE, including the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) committee inquiry and legislative change, so I will not go over that again either.

I have watched with interest all the Committee sessions on this issue. I listened with particular interest to what the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission (NIHRC) said. I fully endorse the views it gave and the recommendations that it made in its input here. NICCY has consistently highlighted the need for the provision of comprehensive, factual, age-appropriate and scientifically accurate relationships and sexuality education in schools. Comprehensive RSE is relevant to a wide range of children's rights, some of which Maddison has already touched on. There are several articles in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child that that speaks to: for example, the right to education; the best interests of the child; the right to health; the right to protection from violence and abuse; the right to survival and development; the right to identity; non-discrimination; and freedom of expression, which is article 13.

We welcome the Relationships and Sexuality Education (Northern Ireland) (Amendment) Regulations 2023, which introduced a mandatory requirement for inclusion on the Northern Ireland curriculum of age-appropriate, comprehensive and scientifically accurate education on sexual and reproductive health and rights, covering prevention of pregnancy and access to abortion for adolescents. Effective RSE will be compliant with a statement from the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child. In its concluding observations in June 2023, it advised that state parties should:

The evidence is clear that young people want a comprehensive programme of RSE as part of the curriculum. The Education and Training Inspectorate (ETI) review of the preventative curriculum reported that young people would like to know more about issues including identity, sexual orientation and LGBTQI. Young people also talked about wanting greater involvement of pupils in RSE, and they asked for more in-depth discussions and delivery by teachers who are confident, knowledgeable and comfortable with the topics.

It is imperative that we listen to young people — Maddison articulated beautifully the views of one young person on the issue — and that they are meaningfully involved in the process relating to RSE. The value of consulting young people as experts on their own lives and as key stakeholders in the development and implementation of RSE is well documented. RSE is likely to be most effective when the current beliefs and practices of children and young people are taken into consideration. The ETI evaluation supports that, having found:

Sufficient investment in teacher professional training to ensure that they are supported and equipped to deliver high-quality and comprehensive RSE must be a priority.

A wide range of issues are of relevance to today's discussion, including RSE policy; guidance; the involvement of parents; monitoring; the responsibilities of teachers and governors; and, of course, the opt-out provision.

I am mindful of time. I think that we are within the 10 minutes, so I will pause, and we will respond to the questions of the Committee.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): Thank you very much for your opening remarks. I will try to practise what I preach and not go too far over time. I will start with a question on the role of young people in developing good RSE material and a good RSE curriculum. This can be for Maddison or anyone who wants to come in: what could be done to better engage young people in the development of their curriculum and of resources to ensure that the curriculum is helpful, reflects the world that they actually live in and meets their needs?

Ms Blair: There are already plenty of youth organisations such as the Northern Ireland Youth Forum, the Secondary Students' Union for Northern Ireland and, of course, NICCY. Engaging with as many young people as possible from those groups and from as many different backgrounds and areas as possible, including rural areas outside Belfast, will ensure that you have a fully developed curriculum and that all the resources are accurate and representative of young people in Northern Ireland.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): As a young person, do you feel that you have been engaged with? For example, were you engaged with on your school's RSE policy?

Ms Blair: No. In most schools, there is very little RSE in place and very little discussion with young people about what should be included in RSE. Love for Life came into my school to deliver RSE. There was very little discussion: you sat in a room and were given a presentation. Young people could be involved more in the education itself.

Mr Quinn: Arlene, do you want to add to that by talking about the importance of inclusion? I am looking at what is in the ETI report. It specifically mentions that the practice of RSE was much more effective when:

That overlaps what young people broadly tell us about inclusion.

Dr Arlene Robertson (Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People): As Maddison touched on, young people should be involved at every stage of the process, informing the RSE resources and the delivery of RSE in schools and being involved in the evaluation of RSE. It is not just about saying, "We have consulted with young people. Box ticked". There should be an ongoing process. Chris mentioned inclusion, and you will be aware that that was touched on by the Gillen review, the NI Human Rights Commission review and the ETI review. RSE in schools is just not inclusive. There has not been enough focus on how we respond effectively to findings about pupils with special educational needs and disability or LGBTQ+ pupils.

Inclusion covers different strands, one of which is making the resources inclusive. Young people need to be able to see themselves in the resources. A lot of the resources are heteronormative, with no reference to same-sex relationships. The case studies that are used in schools, the imagery that is used in the resources, and the terminology and language all need to be reflective of the whole school community and population. It is not enough for a school to say, "We have an inclusive ethos and environment. We respect different views". Pupils need to be able to see themselves in the resources, and teaching needs to be tailored towards their specific needs.

When it comes to pupils with special educational needs and disability, in its focus on pupils with severe learning disabilities, the ETI found that more bespoke resources and training were needed in special schools. I would add that that is also the case for pupils in mainstream schools. There is a range of needs among pupils with special educational needs and disability. There may be pupils on the autistic spectrum for whom there are no specific intellectual barriers but who do not relate to the material in the same way, socially and emotionally, as other students do. In those cases, RSE may need to be taught differently. That area warrants more attention. More attention needs to be given to how the RSE curriculum is developed — the Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment (CCEA) is developing resources — and to the language that is used. More attention also needs to be given to how teachers are trained to enable them to respond effectively to pupils' needs.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): That is very helpful. I will ask one more question before opening it to other members. In your briefing paper, you mention your concern about the level of engagement that is built into the opt-out provisions that came through with the new regulations. What could be done to rectify that and ensure that the voices of young people are heard when an opt-out request is made?

Mr Quinn: Generally speaking, I am concerned, because we are talking about young people aged between 11 and 16. They are approaching the age of consent, and the assumption is that those young people may be engaged in relationships and be sexually active. I have particular concern about the guidance that we saw. My reservations are about the degree to which the young person has a say in the opt-out. Arlene, I will pass back to you, because you have spoken at length about that issue.

Dr Robertson: Pretty much as Chris said, we felt that the guidance was not strong enough. There was very little provision for young people to give their views. A lot of flexibility and discretion was given to schools on consulting young people. It was disappointing that the pro forma did not even have a space for the young person's signature to say that they had been consulted or for them to give their views. A 15-year-old can speak for themself. I appreciate that there are sensitivities around balance and parents, but young people who may be in intimate relationships will have a view about the type of RSE education that they need.

We have been looking at article 5 of the convention. The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child published a statement on it that you might find useful. It goes into the responsibilities and rights of parents to provide appropriate guidance to young people that reflects their "evolving capacities", which means that they should be given increasing responsibility to make decisions for themselves. That could be useful to this debate. The statement also goes into the responsibility of states to "build the capacity of parents".

There are a lot of misconceptions out there because of misinformation campaigns. We need to raise awareness among parents and young people of what this is all about. For us, safeguarding and protecting young people and children and promoting young people's well-being are at the heart of it.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): I will open it up to members. I will start with the Deputy Chair. We are looking at about three minutes per enquiry. The quicker we get to the question and the more focused the answers are, the more helpful that will be.

Mr Sheehan: Thanks, Chair. How extensive has your engagement with the Department and the Minister been?

Mr Quinn: I have to say that there has been limited to no engagement. We had the specific meeting with departmental officials a number of months ago, and we discussed in particular the area that Arlene covered: the lack of opportunity for young people to engage in consultation. I have not engaged with the Minister directly about that, but I have written to the permanent secretary and flagged with officials my concerns about the process. Would colleagues like to add to that?

Dr Robertson: We have regular, periodic meetings with the Department of Education, and it has been on the agenda. Apart from that, it is as Chris said. We have raised our concerns.

Mr Sheehan: But you have not had a meeting with the Minister on the issue?

Mr Quinn: No.

Mr Sheehan: I will move on. From your investigation into RSE, does the type or ethos of a school impact on the level or quality of RSE that it delivers?

Mr Quinn: That is one of the areas that we would appreciate the Committee's looking further at. My opinion is that we need more than guidance; we need a policy. There is probably a role for the ETI in looking at quality-assuring how RSE is taught within the curriculum. We also need to look at the role of governors, and at their awareness of the guidance and the impact of a school's ethos. We have heard anecdotal accounts of school leaders directing teachers not to teach certain elements. I could not give you hard evidence on that, but it is back to the point about how we monitor and quality-assure the teaching of RSE in schools.

Mr Sheehan: Chris, how can that be done?

Mr Quinn: This might be slightly controversial, but, perhaps, at times, governors have too much autonomy. I know that there are probably governors in this room — I was one, myself — but, in this instance, a policy is needed. We are talking about teaching children about healthy relationships. We are talking about children who could be vulnerable or having adverse childhood experiences, and children who are vulnerable to coercion and exploitation. We all have a duty to safeguard those children and work in their best interests. In doing that, it is essential that young people are taught about healthy relationships, boundaries, coercive control and RSE in general. I would argue for a policy, and I would argue that, perhaps, we need to look further at our model of education and the autonomy of governors.

Mr Baker: I will go back to the youth perspective — Maddison, your presentation was brilliant. I am lucky that I get to talk to many young people from my community in youth clubs. Whether it is the young people in the youth club, the more politically engaged young people — like you, Maddison — or the hard-to-reach kids, they all say the same thing: that they are not getting the information where they should be getting it. There is an acceptance that a lot of the information that they get is misinformation on TikTok and all that. While it can be good to some extent, how do we make it better for them? Why are we still having disparity between our schools? Getting better RSE depends on what school a child goes to — one school can be different from another just a mile down the road. Touching on what Pat said, what are the big obstacles? What can be done better? How can there be more of a wraparound, from youth clubs to schools, to make sure that they are well equipped?

Dr Robertson: Part of the issue is this: who is monitoring it and what are they monitoring? Pat mentioned quality. That is a big part of it. Schools have lots of competing priorities. When I have been out and about, I have heard them say that they do not want to dedicate the time to this, or that they do not feel that they have the skills. Recently, I heard a presentation from Nexus in which it talked about going into schools with workshops on consent and other issues that it has a lot of experience in delivering, and which work with small groups of students or a class, but how schools are saying, "We don't have the time for this. We just want you to stand at the front in assembly and deliver it". It is about the quality element and how we will monitor it. I would like to find out more about who will monitor it, when that will happen and what will be involved in the monitoring process, because it could easily be a tick-box exercise. It is about quality and how much time it is given. Research tell us that students want this to be consistent and the messages to be constantly reinforced and revisited. They do not want an attitude of, "We've done that lesson on consent. Let's move on".

Mr Quinn: Learning for life and work is taught up to a certain level in most schools, if not all. Is that right, Maddison?

Ms Blair: Yes, I think so.

Mr Quinn: It is taught in all schools until about fourth year or whatever. I would argue that RSE needs to be part of the learning for life and work curriculum. It needs to be a standardised part of our curriculum. There is a role for CCEA in this. There is an issue about how we support our teaching staff and equip them with the skills and confidence that they need to engage in these types of conversations.

There are experts, particularly in the community and voluntary sector, who can support that kind of approach. I would argue for a hybrid approach, where voluntary sector organisations come in and provide a block of bespoke training and the teacher can be part of that process. Fundamentally, young people have said that it should be stand-alone and consistent. As Arlene said, it should be quality-assured.

Mr Baker: Is that your experience from all sectors of our young people? I mentioned that there are hard-to-reach kids who are not engaging in our youth clubs, and there are young people whom I talk to who are more politically astute. It would be very easy for a politician to say, "That is coming from someone who is well tuned in. RSE is not a big deal to other young ones". My experience is that that is a universal message. Is that your experience?

Mr Quinn: Yes, very much so.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): I ask you to be brief on this, Chris.

Mr Quinn: I go back to the point about vulnerable children. Some of the most vulnerable children whom we engage with do not know that they are being exploited or coerced. We need to reach all children with this. To answer your question, that message is very clear among the majority of children and young people whom I speak to. Nevertheless, there is a particular onus on us to reach those young people who are extremely vulnerable.

Mr Baker: Do we have any more time?

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): Unfortunately not, Danny: we have a packed agenda.

Mr Martin: Thank you for attending this afternoon, folks. You referenced the UN Committee's concluding observations. I will not read it all out, because I have only three minutes. It begins with the words, "Integrate comprehensive, age-appropriate" and ends:

How does that read alongside article 2 of the Equality and Human Rights Commission's (EHRC) protocol? It states:

Just briefly, if you can.

Ms Joanne McGurk (Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People): Yes, that is fine. You will probably be aware, in asking the question, that it is an evolving area of jurisprudence. There is a margin of appreciation in human rights law in how it is applied. I know that you have heard evidence on that before. When you are looking at the balancing of those rights, that margin of appreciation is applied. Certainly, the European courts have a slightly different position from that of the UN Committee's concluding observations. In Wales, there is not an opt-out. That decision went to the High Court and, of course, was deemed compatible with the European Convention and our law here. It is a balancing act, but the important aspect of that is that the fundamental right to education is not undermined when balancing parental rights and children's rights.

Mr Martin: The thing that is undermined is their chance to withdraw children from school if they do not agree with it on religious or philosophical grounds — freedom of religion or freedom of conscience.

Ms McGurk: We are talking about age-appropriate, comprehensive and scientifically accurate information being provided in that sphere, looking at children's health, well-being and safeguarding. Teaching that factual information is what we are advocating for here.

Mr Martin: I think that we find common ground around things such as consent, social media, porn and a whole range of things that Maddison touched on. I suspect that a lot of parents would probably not agree with some elements, for example, around what you have called reproductive rights. Let me leave that for a second, however. I have three minutes, and I want to get my second question in here.

You referenced the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child's concluding observations. I have read it, and it mentions faith once in that 23-page document. It does not advocate at all for or suggest that any children from a faith-based or religious background should have any particular rights. I am surprised at that. Has NICCY produced any policy or released any press statements that advocate for children of a religious or faith-based background, say, in the last year?

Mr Quinn: I have to disagree with you. I do not think that the UN convention does reference a young person's rights and their faith in the way that you have interpreted it.

Mr Martin: OK.

Mr Quinn: Article 13, I think, talks very definitely about the child's right to have a religious identity. I have done my own research on this and engaged with groups from the faith-based sector. I encourage the Committee to do that for itself. I am not going to sit here and speak for them. I encourage the Committee to reach out to those groups.

Mr Martin: No doubt, the Committee will do that, Chris. My question was around NICCY and whether it has advocated for any children of a faith-based or religious background in the last year. Obviously, there is a lot of stuff here, and this is an RSE inquiry. I am very interested in —

Mr Quinn: Yes, of course we have. We represent young people of all walks, and we engage with hundreds, if not thousands, of young people, day in, day out. Of course, we have advocated for people with faith-based backgrounds.

Mr Martin: You have issued 47 statements in the last nine months. Do you want to point me to the one in which, you say, you have advocated for them? Could you point me to a statement in which you have done that, even in the last —

Mr Quinn: Could you point me to one that does not: one that, you feel, is detrimental or negative towards people with a faith-based background? I do not think that any of my statements has been anti faith-based.

Mr Martin: I have not said that they have.

Mr Quinn: So?

Mr Martin: You are the witness, so I cannot answer your question. I am just wondering, having looked at this —

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): We are running short on time.

Mr Martin: I appreciate that. Look, I am quite happy to conclude there, but I did have a look. Certainly, I am very passionate that NICCY represents everybody: all children. Certainly, the UN Committee's concluding observations did not include anything that would support children of faith, and there are lots of them in Northern Ireland. My question was this: had NICCY released any policy documents, press statements or anything in the last nine months, year or even five years that specifically advocated for children from a faith-based background?

Mr Quinn: I think that I have answered the question as much as I can. If you have an issue with any of the statements that I have issued — if you think that it is anti faith-based — I encourage you to write to me. I put on the record that the UN convention is not as you put it in your interpretation. It does protect the rights and best interests of all children, including those of faith.

Mr Martin: At no point did I suggest that.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): I am going to draw a line on this one now. Thank you, Peter.

Michelle, you were next.

Mrs Guy: Thank you, all, for your time. I appreciate the evidence that you have given and am probably a little uncomfortable with the questions that seem to attack your organisation. I am grateful for your evidence, and I think that it has been very helpful.

A couple of people have touched on opt-out. I do not want to cover the same ground, nor do I want to get into a discussion on content, but the Education Authority does have an RSE progression framework. It is not mandatory at the minute, but, if we are looking at bringing in something that is, potentially, mandatory as an outworking of this, do you think that it provides a good basis or a good starting point for what the content might be?

Mr Quinn: Rachel, I can see you nodding. Do you want to take that one?

Ms Rachel Woods (Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People): Yes, I can do.

Peter, I would be happy to issue you with further correspondence in relation to your last question.

Mr Martin: That would be very helpful. Thank you.

Ms Woods: I can point you to some things on our website, should that be helpful to you, particularly around good relations and Brexit. We did a very in-depth analysis with our youth panel, which represents every community in Northern Ireland, and we make great efforts to ensure that it does. I will get back to you in writing on that one.

The framework does exist. The Education (Curriculum Minimum Content) Order (Northern Ireland) 2007 is minimum content. There is a progression there, which has to recognise children's evolving capacities. The issue seems to be over the new regulations. We have been involved in feeding back on the new regulations and the content that comes with that. We made some recommendations, and we look forward to the updated CCEA website. I believe that it will be in the autumn. Arlene, correct me if I am wrong.

Dr Robertson: I think so, yes. It is forthcoming.

Ms Woods: We are due to see some updated content on that. The framework is there. The barrier does not seem to exist from that end, but we do need to increase significantly the levels of student participation in it. We need to make sure that what should be being taught is being taught and that what needs to be taught is being taught. However, we also need to have flexibility. Maddison talked about online harms, and many of you will have been engaged with the Bill that is now the Online Safety Act 2023 and its framework documents. However, what children and young people are being exposed to is constantly changing, and we cannot keep up with it. You are policymakers and legislators. It is very difficult for legislation to keep up with the changes in technology, but we really have to be mindful of where children are getting their education. We have had reports recently — we have all seen them — of children as young as eight years old accessing extreme pornography online. That is where children and young people are getting their relationships and sexuality education because they are not getting it where they should be or what they are getting is not appropriate.

You cannot have it both ways. You cannot have it not being taught properly but say that it is OK to access it second-hand or somewhere else. It needs to be standardised and accessible and to be taught in an open and safe environment by people whom young people trust and with whom they are able to have an engaging conversation. At no stage would we ever say that those ethical and philosophical conversations do not go hand in hand. They absolutely do, but having a minimum, age-appropriate, mandatory and scientifically accurate conversation should not negate anybody receiving that education because of an alternative viewpoint. They are absolutely entitled to that viewpoint — of course they are; it is their right — but it is about having a framework that reflects all those needs. It is very difficult to do that well across the board, but that does exist. There are resources being developed. We certainly welcome being part of that, and we look forward to those being published, hopefully in the autumn, whenever that is.

Mrs Guy: I have one follow-up question. It is a really basic question, but I would like to hear the answer from the perspective of your organisation. What do you think is the fundamental purpose — the outcome that you want — of having an RSE curriculum that is scientifically accurate, factual etc? We have rehearsed those terms. What do you think the ultimate outcome is?

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): One panel member can answer that question briefly.

Mr Quinn: For me, it is about what young people have called for as long as I have worked in this sector: a curriculum for life.

Mrs Guy: That was a nice quick answer.

Dr Robertson: May I add to that? I go back to the CEDAW inquiry, which is where this all originated, and its findings. It looked at girls and young women and the barriers that they were facing in accessing information about abortion, contraception and so forth. That is fundamental to this. If this is not implemented in schools, there will be gendered impacts. We need disaggregated data.

Mr Brooks: Rachel has addressed one of the things that I was going to ask about. I was thankful to hear —. You will forgive the preamble, Chair. [Laughter.]

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): Always, David. [Laughter.]

Mr Brooks: It is about that ethical context, because I sometimes feel that some who come to present on or talk about these issues want these things taught in isolation. Even considering those who do not want to opt out and who are going to take part in such discussions, it seems mad to me that you could have discussions around some of these issues — there are cleavages across the world that divide people — yet not have some of the social discussions around them, whatever the viewpoint.

That having been addressed, Arlene, you mentioned that 15-year-olds can speak for themselves. I think that everybody accepts that, as young people get older, they have greater capacity to make some decisions. I am not trying to be facetious here, but at what age do you think a parent should stop having that parental right to parent their children and to decide what is right morally and ethically and right for their education?

Dr Robertson: That is a valid question and one that I have grappled with myself. It is not just about being age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate and who decides that or how that is assessed. Parents, teachers and the different stakeholders that come into contact with young people every day have a good understanding of their levels of maturity and their capacity to make decisions for themselves. It is an organic process. It cannot be some kind of arbitrary cut-off.

Mr Brooks: Mandatory education on this subject does not work like that either. It is about saying, "OK, they have reached this age, and they now must have this education and must be taught these issues". There are some issues around safeguarding and so on. It is a frustration of mine. We all sit around knowing largely what side of the debate we are on, but we talk past each other around issues. We are largely agreed on things such as consent and safeguarding — there might be other ones — but having all the elements of RSE as mandatory takes that approach. It says to children of a certain age that they are all the same and should all have the same input. It takes the parent away from deciding that, "My child is not ready for that at this stage". That is why I am interested in exploring at what age a parent should stop having that say over a child.

Dr Robertson: It is hard to put a figure on it, to be honest, but I would just take a common-sense approach. At the very least, young people need to have a say. With the way that the guidance is drafted at the moment, parents speak for the young person. There is very little room there to engage with the young person and to allow them to have a view. That is just not acceptable. I think that we need to —.

Sorry, do you want to come in here, Chris?

Mr Quinn: You finish. I have a point for when you are finished.

Dr Robertson: I will let Chris speak.

Mr Quinn: The key thing here is "age-appropriate". That is consistent in all the text here. Article 12 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child talks about the voice of the child. It is very clear about the "age and maturity" of the child and the best interests principle. What is key in this discussion is the age-appropriate element. I add that I hope that, in any school context, there is space for religious or moral and ethical debate outside this part of the curriculum. The answer to the question about age, as Arlene said, is that you cannot put an age on a child for this.

Mr Brooks: I think that that is evident.

If I have time, I want to get another question in. [Inaudible.]

Mr Brooks: Yes, thanks, Chair.

A couple of your comments were on quite simple things. You talked about the majority of people whom you speak to and said that you do not want to speak for people who are in those faith groups. I am not trying to misrepresent you: I understand what you said about that.

Rachel talked about the Youth Forum and representation. Danny touched on the issue of representation in his question: how do we make sure that people of faith and others are accurately represented when we have someone come before the Committee? You presented very well, by the way, and are very articulate. However, how do we make sure that we have representation from young people who are involved in organisations such as yours, which is representative of all young people? You are not going to be able to put forward everybody's viewpoint.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): The question is clear. Time is short. One panel member should respond.

Mr Brooks: How do you do that accurately? How do you accurately ensure that?

Mr Quinn: I heard that raised at a previous Committee meeting about the Youth Assembly. I did not feel very comfortable with it. Sometimes, assumptions are made about young people. Nobody in the Committee knows Maddison's background or any of the —.

Mr Brooks: Nor was I trying to presume to know her background.

Mr Quinn: There is almost an assumption at times that young people who are involved in groups or advocacy are from a certain background. That is wrong, and it is a disservice to the groups that work with them.

From my perspective, having worked in youth participation for years, I know of organisations that do their best to reach out. The voices of all children are really important in this, and, again, I welcome in my work — we welcome in all our work — all youth.

Mr Brooks: I think that there are some that are very hard to reach. That is not a disparaging comment.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): David, I have given you way over time on this one, unfortunately. I have to move on and bring in Robbie. The clock is very much ticking here, so I ask you to go straight to question and answer.

Mr Butler: Thank you so much. Very quickly, I will also ask about the opt-out, if you do not mind. I asked the Human Rights Commission about that. It thought that young people had the capacity and maturity to make a decision to opt out. Obviously, the focus has been in and around adults. What is the position of the office of the Children's Commissioner on, for instance, a 14- to 16-year-old at Key Stage 3 opting out? They might invoke article 14 as their premise for wanting to opt out. Will you give me your position on that?

I do not think that there is a hierarchy of UN articles. We have been encouraging our young people to speak truth to power for many years, but there is no hierarchy of youth. Will you give me your opinion on young people opting out, particularly on the minimum content piece? That is the bit that we are all talking around. Let us be honest, guys, we need to get RSE right to protect our young people, particularly those who are vulnerable and young women.

Mr Quinn: My question around that, Robbie, is about the process. How do you engage the young person in the process? Let us give them a space and the support to discuss their concerns about elements of the curriculum, but, for me, we are not going back. This debate often gets caught up in the moral and ethical considerations.

Mr Butler: I spoke about this with the Human Rights Commission. Perhaps, for some young people, the moral and ethical might be the primary things in their life at that time, and that might be OK for them. It has to be in there. I am not against it at all. I take myself back to when I was 14 or 15 years old, and there is a bit that I would probably have chosen not to sit in on. I am not encouraging anybody not to, but article 14 states that you are entitled to your religious and philosophical ideas as long as you do not hurt anyone else and it does not impact on anyone else. From your perspective, does the Children's Commissioner's office think that it absolutely must be mandatory and that young people with a capacity cannot opt out?

Mr Quinn: The first thing that I would say is that this is a discussion about RSE, not RE. Those two things —.

Mr Butler: I am asking you about RSE and the minimum content piece, Chris, which is what this is all about. I get that, so I just —.

Mr Quinn: With respect, Robbie, I am trying to answer you. My view would be about getting that process right: what is the process? If a child wants to opt out, what is the process? The process that is there at the minute is not appropriate. This is based on the parent. This is a parental opt-out.

Mr Butler: I get that, Chris, but I am not asking about that. I am asking you whether there should be scope for a young person to opt out? I am not asking about the parents. Honestly, I do not think that it is obtuse of me.

Mr Quinn: With regard to scientifically accurate —.

Mr Butler: No. OK. You are not going to answer, Chris. That is fine. Thank you.

Mrs Mason: My question is brief. To be honest, I am perplexed at some of the previous Member's line of questioning. You said it, Chris: we are here to talk about RSE. From my experience, NICCY reps, in even my area, are champions of all children no matter their background, whether they have a particular faith or none.

I want to ask one simple question, and it is going against last week because it is probably a closed question

and it is this: does a child's having a particular faith or none make any difference in how or whether you represent them?

Mr Quinn: I will represent every child; that is my ambition. There are 500,000 children in Northern Ireland. I am doing my damnedest to meet every single one of them, despite my team saying, "Chris, will you stay in the office for a while?". [Laughter.]

I will talk with anyone, work with anyone and represent the views of anyone, and we are proactive in doing that. We seek to engage; we target; we listen. In answer to your question, I am here to serve every child in Northern Ireland.

Mrs Mason: Thank you.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): I will finish with one thing that it might be helpful to reflect on with regard to opt-outs. I do not want to speak for NICCY, because there has been a lot of discussion back and forth. From my perspective, it is important that we note that parents are quite right to raise concerns and register an interest in their child's education. I do not think that anyone on the Committee is going to argue with that. From my perspective, however, I want to put on the record that my concern around the opt-out is its blanket nature. It is the lack of robust provision to hear what the young person or child is saying.

It does not sit well with me that a parent can sign a letter to say, "My child does not object". There is no robust process there, and that is where my concern rests. However, we probably need to be cautious about setting children against parents in this scenario, because the vast majority of parents have the best interests of their child at heart, and the vast majority of educators have the interests of children at heart.

There is a space where we can have these conversations in a non-threatening manner and where everyone's views are taken into account. I do not want to prejudge the outcomes of this inquiry, but my big concern is that the current guidance, it feels to me, provides no space for the child's voice to be heard. That is my concern. Schools should be supported to create policies that ensure that, yes, parents have a space to have their voices heard but so should the young person.

That is my view at this stage, but we have a lot more evidence to hear. I am happy to leave it at that. Thank you all for your time. When time is against us, it is tricky to cover the issues in the required level of detail, but thank you all for your time. It is great to see you all again.