Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): With us today are Alexa Moore, policy, campaigns and communications manager, Rainbow Project; and Sophie Nelson, policy officer, HERe NI. You are very welcome to the Education Committee. It is great to have you here. I will introduce the format, and then it will be over to you.

We ask witnesses to give a presentation of up to 10 minutes. Please set out your assessment of the current picture with relationships and sexuality education (RSE) provision and your thoughts around the need for reform in that area. Then we will move to questions and answers. We try to stick to five minutes per enquiry with each member. I ask everyone to work with me to facilitate that, so that we can get round everybody. I will try to keep an eye on the members who are attending online to make sure that everybody is brought in. At this stage, I will hand over to you.

Ms Alexa Moore (Rainbow Project): Thank you so much. It is fabulous to be here. Thanks to the Chair, the Clerk and everyone who facilitated us coming in here today. I have already been introduced. The Rainbow Project is an organisation that works with LGBTQIA+ communities across Northern Ireland. Through our public advocacy, we work to change society, and through our delivery of services, we work to change the lives of LGBTQIA+ people across Northern Ireland.

Ms Sophie Nelson (HERe NI): HERe NI is the only LGBTQIA+ women's organisation in the North. We work to support lesbian and bisexual women and their families through a range of peer support, family groups, policy work and training.

Ms Moore: We really welcome the mini-inquiry. We have been keenly engaged in the process of delivering and reforming relationships and sexuality education in Northern Ireland, and we are really keen to see change for LGBTQIA+ pupils in the region.

I will start by talking a bit about LGBT young people's current experience in our schools. Unfortunately, LGBT young people have been, frankly, failed by our education system for many years in a variety of ways: through historical and contemporary exclusion; through the curriculum and the lack of discussion of issues relating to LGBT identities, relationships and experiences; and through their experiences of things such as bullying, harassment and intimidation by their peers and, unfortunately, sometimes receiving negative experiences from their teachers or support staff in the school.

In advance of the Committee, we held a number of focus groups for LGBTQIA+ young people with our Rainbow youth group in Derry/Londonderry and with the Cara-Friend youth group in Belfast. We have held a few focus groups over the past few years in advance of previous consultations as well. One of the key things that came out of the focus groups is that many people just had not heard of RSE. The participants were kids aged, perhaps, between 14 and 17, some of them were doing their AS levels or their A levels, and they had not heard of RSE. If they had had RSE delivered, it had happened only once — one time — perhaps in a whole-school assembly with a distinct focus on biology, menstruation or things like that. All of that is really important as part of a comprehensive RSE curriculum, but there was not the rounded approach that they wanted.

A number of the kids said that they had experienced discussions of those topics only in the context of religious education. When homosexuality or LGBTQIA+ identities and relationships came up in that context, the discussion often turned into almost a debate about whether being gay was right or wrong. You can imagine, I am sure, how that would make an LGBT young person feel in that space. I am not long out of school myself, but I received RSE in the past 10 years — I am showing my age — and it was one session in an assembly with virtually no mention of LGBT identities. I raised my hand and asked, "What about gay and bisexual people? What about trans people?", but the external facilitators who had been brought in were just not prepared to answer those questions in any great detail. One of the many problems is that teachers or external providers are either not equipped or not willing to address some of those concerns. If you look at our briefing document, you will see a lot more information about, for example, the Department of Education's research on experiences in school.

I will pass over to Sophie to talk a wee bit about what we think should be the content of RSE.

Ms Nelson: Thank you. Across Northern Ireland, schools from different denominations with a varying school ethos can decide how detailed their RSE provision is and which external organisations can come in to provide the teaching. That often leads to topics that are considered core to a comprehensive sex education being excluded or covered only in passing. As you are aware, the Education (Curriculum Minimum Content) Order 2007 provides a simple baseline of content that has to be covered in RSE. Anything beyond that is non-statutory, and schools have the flexibility to decide on the content of the RSE programme that they teach, with the exception of information on abortion and the prevention of early pregnancy, which, as of this year, is subject to parental opt-out.

From our engagement with young people, it is clear that that approach to RSE, whereby topics are excluded or covered only in passing, is not an adequate method of delivery.

It does not come close to providing the gold standard of RSE that our young people deserve. In light of the evidence that Alexa outlined, I can say that too many young people above the age of 14 with whom we spoke had received little to no sex education.

The Education (Curriculum Minimum Content) Order covers some key areas of RSE, which we highlighted in our brief to the Committee, yet the order does not explicitly cover some topics that we, as a sector, see as vital to high-quality, comprehensive sex education: for example, consent; violence prevention and particularly gender-based violence prevention; gender equality and misogyny; domestic and sexual abuse; menstrual health and well-being; and social media and online safety. An inclusion of LGBTQIA+ relationships and sexuality across all content areas would mean that we can move away from teaching RSE through a heteronormative lens.

It is worth pointing out that Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment (CCEA) has a sound RSE progression framework, based on international evidence frameworks, which provides a non-statutory progression pathway in RSE from Foundation Stage to post-16 level. It covers many of the themes that I listed. However, it is not statutory, meaning that schools can leave those topics behind, despite them being critical for a young person's education. I think here particularly about consent, gender equality and misogyny. In the North, four women were killed in six weeks during August and September due to femicide. We have an epidemic of gender-based violence here, and its prevention needs to start in school in relationships and sexuality education.

When it comes to teaching and learning RSE, many young people involved in our consultation focus groups understood that teachers are often best placed to provide RSE, given their sustained contact with pupils. A small number of young people disagreed with that, stating that they would feel more comfortable discussing such issues with an external provider whom they do not have to see in school every day. However, there was agreement across the board that whoever delivers the content must teach a comprehensive, inclusive and standardised curriculum that covers all areas of RSE and that they should not pick and choose which topics they want to include.

Our recommendation to the Department is that it should upskill and resource specialist staff to deliver RSE in order to move away from the prevalence of external providers and to ensure that knowledge and expertise around RSE is developed in-house in schools. Currently, RSE is delegated to teachers who have gaps in their timetable, leaving them very little time to develop materials for their class and give pupils the best learning experience.

It is important to note that that does not mean excluding external providers from schools altogether. Particularly for LGBTQIA+ young people, the delivery of LGBT awareness and anti-bullying workshops in schools may be one of the only ways that LGBTQIA+ young people see themselves being visible in a school context. However, bringing in external providers to deliver the whole RSE curriculum is not a sustainable approach. It leads to patchwork provision of RSE that differs between schools. Indeed, some LGBTQIA+ young people whom we spoke to felt that, with external facilitators, real or perceived biases lessened their ability to learn and reduced their trust in the information provided.

Ms Moore: A lot is missing from RSE content. One key element that we want to see being integrated throughout not only the RSE curriculum but the whole curriculum is the discussion and inclusion of LGBTQIA+ identities. I am a firm believer in starting relationships and sexuality education early and scaling it to the issues that might present to young people as they develop, age and grow.

It is the same with the discussion or inclusion of LGBT identities. When you talk to primary-school kids about their parents and what families look like, it is not that hard to say, "There may be a mum and a dad, but there could also be a dad and a dad or a mum and a mum". That is really important not only for LGBTQIA+ young people but for young people who may have LGBT family members. My sister went to school just after I started transitioning, so she knew what a trans person or trans woman was. Not being able to discuss that in school or not having teachers who are equipped to deal with those topics when they come up can be quite detrimental.

When it comes to the inclusion piece, we really need to look across the board at discussions around consent, sexual or romantic relationships and platonic friendships, as well as discussions around coming out. There are probably LGBTQI+ young people in every school in Northern Ireland; I say that almost without a doubt. Those young people deserve to feel respected, represented and visible within the curriculum. It is really important.

I will close with this, because we are pretty much out of time. We have referenced some research in our briefing. There have been three decades of research on relationships and sexuality education. One of the key pieces that jumped out at me was that the inclusion of LGBT relationships, identities and experiences in RSE actually helps to drive down homophobic, transphobic and biphobic bullying and harassment in schools. That is not inclusion as a debate topic or a kind of, "Is it OK to be gay? Is it not OK to be gay?". That is a meaningful inclusion of LGBT people as normal people who have relationships, are engaged in sexual activity and live their lives in society much like everyone else.

I thank you for your time and for inviting us here today. I welcome any questions that you might have.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): Thank you, both. It has been great to hear your perspective this afternoon.

I may not focus on this in a lot of detail, but one of the things that I have found to be really helpful in your presentation is that, other than us hearing from CCEA right at the beginning, you are probably the first group that has given a helpful reminder of what is actually in the minimum content order, and it is quite stark what is not in there. That is an issue that we will have to work through as we produce a Committee report. While everything in there is absolutely fine and nobody is going to object to any of it, it leaves such huge scope for things not to be included. The question is to what extent the Committee will be comfortable with that. It will be helpful for us to focus our thinking on what is not there; the CCEA resources are good, but you do not have to deliver them.

Thinking specifically on the LGBT issues, given the nature of the organisations that you are representing, we have had quite a lot of discussion in previous sessions around the need for information to be provided to young people. Our previous evidence session covered that, and our engagement with young people yesterday evening covered that. Young people are asking for information to help them to make choices. There have also been witnesses who have focused more heavily on the need for a moral framework to wrap around that and the need for space for discussion of the ethical considerations around the issues.

How would you advise that those two things can be balanced in RSE? In particular, one of the things that has been on my mind since some of the evidence sessions is about how to make sure that an LGBT young person does not have their identity attacked and that they are, essentially, having lessons conducted in a safe space. That is my question: how can we ensure that RSE lessons are a safe space for LGBT young people?

Ms Moore: It is a really important question. The main way to do that is by integrating LGBT relationships, identities and experiences throughout the curriculum, without exceptionalising it or making it, "OK, so here is the LGBT content, and now we are going to discuss LGBT people". For LGBT young people who may be in the room and listening to that, it almost puts their heckles up. They think, "Oh God. Here we go. Here is another debate about my life, who I fancy and my gender". That is not useful for LGBT young people. It is not useful for the wider student population either to be constantly engaged in those debates. There are lots of questions about where morals fit into RSE or the discussion on the different topics. It is really important to foster that inclusive environment, where those discussions can happen. It does not happen by saying, "OK. Is homosexuality wrong? Yes or no? Put your hand up if you think yes. Put your hand up if you think no". That singles people out, and it also serves to ostracise and marginalise the LBGT young people who might be in that room.

It is also worth noting that not all LGBT young people in school will be out. They will not be open about their identity. They might be questioning themselves and thinking, "I might be trans, I might be gay, I might be bi". It is about presenting it in a non-judgemental, evidence-based and fact-based way — LGBT people exist; this is how they exist; this is what LGBT relationships look like; and this is what a trans person is — without adding, "And some people do not agree with that". LGBT people know that; we know that already, unfortunately. You can integrate it in a way that does that well.

Ms Nelson: The Department could have a really key role in that by upskilling teachers to be able to feel confident in tackling questions about sexual orientation and gender identity and to be able to create a safe space in RSE lessons so that they can support pupils. As teachers, they also need to feel supported. It is about the Department stepping in, upskilling teachers and resourcing schools.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): Thank you for that.

I have only one other question. Bearing in mind that, as we know, RSE provision is not consistent and there is a lot of variation, to what extent do you consider RSE, as it is currently being delivered, to be inclusive for LGBT young people? I know that that will involve a big generalisation, but what do you hear from the young people with whom you engage?

Ms Moore: Of course. I suppose that, well, it really depends. There are examples of really good practice in certain schools across Northern Ireland. There are examples where LGBT young people have set up a gay-straight alliance or an LGBT group where they can be a bit more visible in school, but all the young people whom we have spoken to in focus groups and in our engagement in advance of this session said that LGBT issues were just not mentioned; they were either not mentioned or, when they were, they were brought up as a piece of discourse or debate.

To piggyback on a point that was made in the previous evidence session: that leads young people online. Often, they cannot talk to their peers. They may be the only LGBT young person in their class or school. That directs them online to search for information, which may not be accurate, may not be best practice and, as was said previously, may not have the child's best interests at heart.

Unfortunately, I would say that — we use the term a lot — it is a bit of a postcode lottery. It depends on where you go, what school you are at and even what happens within schools. We have heard from two young people at the same school who had really different experiences of RSE because they were in different years and there were different teachers providing it. When you do not have that kind of standardised baseline, you have nothing. We cannot make a generalisation about how it is across Northern Ireland, but I would say that, on the whole, it is generally poor.

Ms Nelson: For us and what we want RSE to look like, it would really be to provide all pupils in schools with factual and scientific information to enable them to make informed choices in relation to their sexual and emotional health and well-being. Some of the young people in the focus groups told us that they wanted to focus on consent, contraception, STIs, unhealthy relationships, how to recognise that you are LGBTQIA+, how to come out and navigating families that may not be affirming. As a sector, we have the evidence to be able to say, "OK. This is what good RSE should look like". It is not just us: it is backed by a number of international frameworks and evidence. For us, a lot of evidence points in the direction of providing young people with that factual information, which leads them to make informed choices about their own bodies.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): Thank you. That is it from me. I will open the floor now. Deputy Chair, do you want to come in first?

Mr Sheehan: Thanks, Chair, and thanks, both of you, for your presentation.

I want to follow on from the theme of the Chair's first question and the comments that you made, Alexa, about integrating the issue of LGBTQI+ rights throughout the day-to-day life of the school. That presumes that schools are non-judgemental institutions. Unfortunately — well, depending on the point of view from which you come at it — most schools have a particular ethos. The vast majority of schools in the North have a Christian ethos. Even within that ethos, homosexuality is seen as sinful and wrong. Issues such as abortion are seen as wrong. How can a school integrate LGBT issues throughout it while not being judgmental about the rights and wrongs of that? Do you have a view on that?

Ms Moore: It is a good question. I can certainly provide a view. The overarching ethos of, hopefully, all our schools is to provide young people with the best quality of education and prepare them in the best possible way for their life, whatever that might look like. Student populations in all schools are diverse. There is no homogeny. Of course, schools have their own ethos, moral background or whatever, and they have their own views on all the issues that you presented, but, from our perspective, when you allow that to reduce the quality of education that an LGBTQIA+ young person receives, that breaches the other ethos of trying to give those young people the best possible start in life. I really think that you can balance those. There is religious education, and you can present the school's ethos and that view, but you can also acknowledge that LGBT people have existed throughout history. We should be talking about Mark Ashton from Portrush in our history classes as a pivotal LGBTQIA+ person from Northern Ireland who went on to make real change in Britain. That is what I mean by integrating it throughout the curriculum. You do not have to have a moral view on LGBT relationships, identities or experiences to acknowledge that LGBTQIA+ people exist, that we have existed for a long time, and that we will continue to exist and make contributions across all subject areas in society. I do not think that those issues are in conflict.

The question about religious education versus integrated, or non-religious, education is important. There is not a massive correlation of all integrated schools being really good in that regard and all religious schools being really bad. That is not what we see. There are many religious schools with a religious ethos that have really good practice around including LGBTQIA+ young people and including them in the curriculum, and there are many integrated schools that do not.

Mr Sheehan: Integrated schools also have a Christian ethos.

Ms Moore: Certainly. My point is that that ethos does not necessarily define the experience that an LGBTQIA+ young person has in a school. It might be defined elsewhere, such as by whether the teachers have been trained in supporting LGBT young people, whether they have integrated that throughout the curriculum, or whether they have considered the safeguarding of LGBT young people in particular.

Sophie, do you have anything to add?

Ms Nelson: That is a challenge. Even if teachers are trained well, if they go into a school with an ethos that tells them that they cannot teach certain information, there is a problem. Strong leadership is needed, especially from the Department, to equip schools to lead on equality for not just LGBTQIA+ people but all marginalised people. There is no way that LGBTQIA+ young people do not go to their teachers in schools with a Catholic ethos. Schools work with LGBTQIA+ young people in their own ways. It is about acknowledging that and the Department's being able to provide resources and support for schools that are willing to say, "Yes, we want additional support on this".

Mr Sheehan: The issue was highlighted last week. I do not know whether you saw the evidence from the transferors. Dr Andy Brown said that, although factual scientific evidence should, of course, be presented, the school has its moral framework. I do not know whether that moral framework is superimposed right over the top of the factual evidence or whether it is a Venn diagram. I am trying to visualise how an ethos that says, "Homosexuality is wrong" can teach RSE in a non-partisan way. Do you think that that is a difficulty that can be overcome? Is it an obstacle that we can get over?

Ms Moore: I do. Part of my thinking around that is that I do not think that even the majority of people who hold Christian beliefs — people who hold Catholic or Protestant beliefs — believe that homosexuality is wrong. The religious communities on the ground have moved with the times on that and on many other issues, be it abortion or contraception or anything like that. I do not necessarily think that there is a conflict there.

My grandparents are extremely religious people. They will go to church every day, but they are the most loving and supportive of me, as an LGBTQI+ person. Their religious ethos does not conflict with that. It complements that. It is, "Love thy neighbour as you would love yourself or love God". There may be that conflict on the face of it, but it all comes down to people: the people in leadership, as Sophie was saying. What is the overarching ethos? Is it to prepare kids for the best possible life, hopefully, in every school? I would like to think so, so I do not necessarily think that they are conflicting.

It is important that young people have a rounded view of religion, of the scriptures and of what certain religions say about certain topics, but that starts to affect LGBT young people's quality of education when it becomes a debate; when it becomes discourse around whether you think that LGBT people are wrong, or when it is preached as fact.

Ms Nelson: One of the ways around that would be not having RSE taught in religious education, but having it as a subject, with teachers who are trained to teach it. That is core to solving the problem, as well.

Ms Moore: Absolutely. There are many areas of science, or whatever, that might have conflicted with certain elements of certain religions, and there have been very few issues as regards integrating those topics, so I do not think that it is necessarily an issue here. If it is, it is one that can certainly be worked on.

Mr Sheehan: OK, thank you.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): We were running out of time on that enquiry. Is there anyone else indicating at this stage?

Mr Martin: Thank you very much, Sophie and Alexa. I got to the briefing paper very late, so I apologise.

In your paper, you list, from your perspective, a number of essential topics missing from the order. You said that they are consent; violence prevention; gender equality and stereotyping; domestic and sexual abuse; menstrual health and well-being; social media and online safety; and the inclusion of LGBTQIA+ relationships and sexuality across all areas.

One of the things that the Committee is looking at, in particular, is what goes in or what the Committee considers should be made mandatory. That is one of the things that you will certainly hear reflected, week on week. Are there any priorities from that list? What would you say is the number one or number two thing on that list?

Ms Nelson: They are all important. It is hard to create a hierarchy, to be honest. Earlier, I mentioned consent, gender-based violence and teaching about misogyny. The prevalence of gender-based violence at the minute in this region is an epidemic, and the teaching needs to start in schools. That is a priority for us, especially for HERe NI, as a women's organisation, as well.

Some of those things are easily done when it comes to incorporating LGBTQIA+ relationships and sexuality across all the areas of the curriculum. As Alexa said, in primary school, if you are talking about parents, maybe some people have two mums or two dads. It is the same when you are using examples in class. If you are in a science class and are looking at Jenny and Derek, who are in a relationship and picking apples, it could be Derek and James, you know.

It is about incorporating that inclusivity across the board. When it comes to essential topics, in our view, there is no hierarchy, but there are some essential topics that really need to be included, like those that I just mentioned.

Ms Moore: I will create a hierarchy, if I may. Sophie is absolutely right: all those topics are really important, but when it comes to safeguarding young people, RSE is essential. Young people need to be able to identify when they are experiencing abuse or coercive control, when they are at risk and when they should talk to someone about it. You constantly hear stories of young people who maybe do not know the words for different body parts, so when they talk to a teacher, they cannot describe the negative thing that has happened to them. That is a safeguarding issue inasmuch as it helps to ameliorate or start to address social and health inequalities for LGBT people when we are included.

Mr Martin: Thank you, Alexa. The Committee is hearing about safeguarding nearly from week to week on that wider picture.

I have one more question, which is more for you, Alexa. The Rainbow Project signposts to a number of organisations, one of which is GenderGP. I did not get all these notes until 1.35 pm, so I looked at the Rainbow Project website. GenderGP has advice that is in light of the Hilary Cass review, which you will be aware of and which reported this year. There is a section on GenderGP that is labelled:

It says:

This is not hidden; it is just there. Is that something that you, as an organisation, are aware of? It is nothing to do with you in particular, but is the Rainbow Project aware of it? What is your response to that?

Ms Moore: The puberty blockers decision is really challenging for a lot of young people and their families. They are really struggling to know where to go. Many of those people have been on puberty blockers for a long time — it is maybe not a long time but a year or two — and they have been starting their medical transition. We do not necessarily have a view on GenderGP; it is just one of the services that is out there for people. I am sure that you are aware that there are many views on all sides on that.

The reality is that, when supportive parents are pushed into a corner, they are going to do what is best for their child. It is unfortunate that they have been pushed into that corner. We do not know of anyone who is doing what you talked about, so I cannot tell you about it. I do not work on the services side of the organisation; I do the policy and campaigns work. The reality is that when you shut down safe and regulated routes to accessing that care — it is the same with access to abortion and many other areas of healthcare — people are, unfortunately, forced to go outside those regulated routes. We support that being provided through the NHS and locally based and accessible healthcare services. I would be happy to meet you or any of your colleagues to discuss that further.

Mr Martin: I will probably take you up on that. Do you at least accept that, given the Cass review findings and the decision not to prescribe those medications for children, advocating creating scripts in someone else's name is not a good idea?

Mr Brooks: It is illegal.

Mr Martin: It is illegal.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): I will come in here. First, time is against us, so I will ask you to answer briefly. Secondly, we should stay focused on the RSE inquiry. We have definitely widened out beyond the inquiry's terms of reference. It is entirely up to you, Alexa, whether you want to cover that issue in particular, because it is a health matter, and I do not think that it is within our Committee's remit.

Ms Moore: To bring it back to RSE, because it certainly —.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): I ask for brief answer, because we are over time on this.

Ms Moore: To bring it back to RSE, this is the kind of discussion that should be happening. There are some transgender young people who maybe have questions on what medical transition entails but have no one to ask those questions of and nowhere to get that kind of unbiased information from. If we start to equip teachers with the knowledge, experience and expertise to help young people figure those things out and provide that non-directive help that supports and affirms LGBT young people, we start to move away from any of the misinformation that we are seeing online. Yes, I would be happy to pick this up at a later date.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): Danny, you indicated that you wanted to speak next.

Mr Baker: Thank you so much. That was very informative. I want to follow on from what you were saying about the importance of really good RSE. All the young people that we met last night and anyone I am engaging with at the youth club says the same, which is they are not getting the facts. I give credit to one school in West Belfast, because a young person said about it that, "We got really good RSE. It covered all of it." That was great to hear, but it is in the minority.

It is about getting at the facts and removing the judgement. You touched on it. We need to drive down homophobia, transphobia and gender-based violence. We will do that only through education. If you get into that moral debate about what is right and wrong, you are not giving the facts. You heard that in the direction that that last question was going. You are right: young people in transition need facts. That is so important, but teachers need that training and schools, because the ethos of the school — you said it again —. I am sorry, I do not really have a question here. I am just saying this.

Ms Moore: It is more of a comment. [Laughter.]

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): That clock is still ticking, regardless. [Laughter.]

Mr Martin: The clock has not stopped, Danny.

Mr Baker: It should be education, really, above all. For me, the direction should be to listen to our young people. They are saying loud and clear that they are not getting the education that they need, and we need to tackle gender-based violence, transphobia and homophobia from an early age.

Ms Moore: They are not getting it, but they are also not getting asked their opinion on it, which is a really key thing. One of the statutory requirements for schools is that they have a wide scope to decide what they teach and what they do not, but they have to consult with the teaching staff, the parents and the pupils in developing that. Every single young person — bar one — who we talked to had not been consulted. They had never been asked for their views on relationships and sexuality education, bar one, and that was in an external youth service, not in a school.

Obviously, I agree with everything that you said about driving down homophobia, biphobia and transphobia. We also need to empower and involve young people in the development of the materials. We need to be constantly talking to young people and ask, "What works, what does not and how can we best support you?".

Mr Baker: I do actually have a question. [Laughter.]

Some of the young people I have talked to say that they almost feel that it is like we are going backwards again. There is an increase in the campaigns, particularly towards transphobia. There is a real attack on trans people. The fear has really grown in young people. We have an inclusive group in the youth club that I volunteer in, and it is great to see them thriving in the community and coming out in themselves and expressing themselves. However, that fear is really there, and it has been there now for about 18 months. I just wondered whether you are seeing that reflected right across the community?

Ms Moore: Yes, and I mean 100% — I will keep this short because I am sure that you want to come in on it — particularly for transgender young people. They are seeing their life and identities debated day in, day out by politicians in the media and everywhere as though they do not exist or do not deserve a say in their own life. The puberty blockers decision was a key example of that, but it is not the only example. It has been going since at least 2016, if not longer. If we remove our views from this for a second and just think about a transgender young person who is going through their teen years and considering coming out but seeing day in, day out attacks on them and on transpeople, we find that they see that Northern Ireland and the UK is not a place for them.

We hear constantly of transgender young people wanting to move away. I was one of those people in school. I was desperate to move away. I did not want to stay here, because it did not feel like a place that supports and includes trans and LGBT young people more widely. Beyond the debates and the issues, the impact that that has on our young people is detrimental, and we see really poor mental health as a result.

Ms Nelson: You talked a bit about youth groups and youth clubs. One of the main things that we do as a sector is provide peer support groups. I cannot stress enough how important those peer support groups are, particularly for LGBTQIA+ young people who maybe do not see that support in their school. For them, those are places that they can go to and be themselves.

Our services are being decimated, so we are finding resourcing hard. You will know that that is the case across the board, but we really do get the crumbs. It is very hard to deliver projects and stuff in organisations when we do not even have project funding. It is very hard to deliver for the young people and everyone we work with. I reinforce that point about the importance of providing those safe spaces in the community for LGBTQIA+ young people. It starts with RSE and with school. School is where people spend five days a week, so there is a huge responsibility for the Department to take the lead on this. Of course, we have a number of recommendations, which you will see in our briefing.

Mrs Guy: Thank you very much for the evidence that you have given so far. I echo the comments on how brilliant yesterday was, and everybody has been saying it. It was just the best session; it was so good.

I do not know where to start. As a wee preface to my questions, I will touch on the fact that there is a lot of discussion about ethos. We have to be really careful that ethos is not used as a cover for bigotry. At the end of the day, that is where facts are really important in getting rid of that confusion. When this topic first came on to the political agenda, I guess, towards the end of last year, there was an explosion of misinformation and disinformation. A campaign was launched that some elected representatives championed. I want to understand how that felt. Did you get any contact from kids in school settings about that? Did you do anything specific to rebut that, or do you have materials that might be useful for people to challenge the misinformation and disinformation that is out there? Are there statistics on LGBT bullying rates in schools? I did not get your briefing until late on, so, if that information is in the briefing, I apologise. What impact do you think good RSE would have on bullying rates in schools?

Ms Nelson: I will pick up on the point on the very frustrating misinformation campaigns. We both sit on the Women's Policy Group. The Women's Policy Group and the women's sector as a whole were left to firefight those claims through social media posts. We used spooky Halloween myths, saying, "Bust the RSE myth". It was disappointing that we did not have more support from the Department in trying to reach schools, although I know that it has written to some schools, and to talk to them about that misinformation and what is going wrong. It was really left to the women's sector, the LGBT sector and other groups to firefight those claims and that misinformation.

Cara-Friend, the other LGBTQIA+ youth organisation, conducted a survey. You will see some of the statistics from that in our briefing paper, including the fact that 68% of LGBTQ+ youth — that is 68% — have experienced bullying in school; 72% of LGBTQ+ youth have experienced negative attitudes; and 61% reported that they had contemplated suicide. That was in 2017. From the way that people have been talking about the backwards slide in some of the attitudes towards the community, I would say that there has not been much improvement.

Ms Moore: I cannot imagine that there would be, and I suppose that is backed up by the Department of Education's research, which was also published in 2017 and shows that over half of pupils stated that sexual orientation and gender identity did not come up in their classes. As I said, 75% heard about it through religious education. That research also went into experiences of bullying. When LGBT issues came up, roughly a third of pupils felt that they were handled well and roughly a third felt that they were handled badly. When trans issues came up, two thirds thought that they were handled badly or very badly. When teachers are not equipped to challenge that — as an LGBT young person, I saw this in school — they see homophobic, biphobic or transphobic bullying and say, "Stop that", and that is where it is left. When teachers are not equipped with the knowledge and expertise to proactively address it, when it is not covered in any of the classes and when LGBT people are invisible in the curriculum, you create an environment where it is OK to bully LGBTQIA+ young people. When, to come back to your point, you have all that misinformation and disinformation and all that discourse in the media, it reinforces the view that, "It is OK to bully someone because they are gay or they are trans".

A lot of LGBT young people are feeling quite isolated in schools and scared about where the public discourse is going. Those young people deserve to feel supported, they deserve to feel seen and they deserve to have their staff and teachers be equipped to support them properly. That is just not the case, unfortunately. That is why we see bullying and poor mental health. LGBT people do not have poor mental health because they are LGBT; they have it because of the wider context in which they live, which is a context that does not see them, does not represent them and does not support them, unfortunately.

Mrs Guy: It sounds as though we need more stats to evidence that.

Ms Moore: More research is always good.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): I am pushing the Department on that.

Ms Moore: We also need more action. I am very reticent about saying, "Fund more research", because, although it is really important, we have a lot of research. The 2017 Department of Education research was done, and, unfortunately, it sat on the shelf. We have acknowledged the problem, but we have not done anything about it.

Mrs Guy: That is fair.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): Across all the prejudice-based bullying, we are clear, as a Committee, that there is a real data gap. We will continue to raise that with the Department. It is not just on LGBT issues. There seems to be an issue with funding; it is a resource issue around research. The Committee has been quite clear that it would like to see progress on that area.

Mr Brooks: Thank you for your presentation. I have to say that I have an issue that comes out of Peter's question, but it does not necessarily have to be dealt with here. We can deal with it after the session, but I wanted to note it.

Having listened to what you said, I think that, as we have said in other sessions, for a subject that is perceived to be so divisive at times, there is a lot, such as safeguarding and other parts of it, that many people can agree and find common ground on. You must have been listening to us in our previous session when we talked about our session last night. Kids expressed their wish for factual information that was as unbiased as possible, and, as we drew that out, they said that they also wanted to hear about other matters. I said that I find it difficult to see how you can tease out, discuss and learn about some of the more controversial elements — abortion was the example that I used — without engaging with the debates that are held internationally and the spectrum of views that there are on those issues. I understand what you are saying about how someone might feel. Nobody wants anyone to feel isolated or to have their education affected by what is discussed in schools, particularly as it pertains to them, but how do we allow for that discussion about the kind of debates that happen worldwide, the different ethical views and the full spectrum of that in schools, even if it is driven by the class rather than by a teacher? Do you have any ideas about how we can allow that element of learning to take place without people feeling that they are being picked on or made an example of?

Ms Moore: How do we teach about any controversial issue in school? You have to do it with sensitivity. You have to do it with the young people's best interests and learning experience in mind. We should not shy away from those discussions, but they need to be had in the context that there might be a LGBT person in the class who is being made to feel uncomfortable because their classmates are saying, "I do not think that gay people should exist". Whether that happens is another point. We need to start thinking about safeguarding LGBT young people in particular when we have those discussions. It is completely reasonable to talk about what happens around the world. In fact, we should. The death penalty is still active for homosexuality in tens of countries around the world. Talk about that. That is where the ethical and moral issues can come in.

Mr Brooks: You talked about different minorities. There are minorities in classes, particularly in some areas of Belfast, where some schools are integrated in many different ways, as are the non-integrated schools. There are people from different minority faith backgrounds who are not Christian, and Pat referred to that. There are aspects of the discussion that will make those people feel isolated if the majority in the class have a different view or they are not on the same page as most of their class.

We discussed this last night, but that is why some of those discussions should take place in a moderated environment, such as in a school with a teacher in order to allow learning about different views. If a classmate has a different view to mine, and that is OK, we can get on and be friends because it does not preclude those relationships or friendships, but understanding differences is key to that and some of those discussions are key to building that understanding. It is a key part of the learning, but how do we have those discussions respectfully if that person is from a minority faith, a Christian faith, an LGBT background or feels that they are both those things or a multitude of things?

Ms Moore: One of the key issues that you raised is the difference between having a view on something and being something. LGBT people cannot change who we are. We cannot change being gay, bisexual or trans, because that is an innate part of ourselves that does not go away, regardless of how other people feel about it. If the discussion or discourse in the class is that being LGBT, gay or trans is wrong, that puts the spotlight on someone who cannot change who they are.

Mr Brooks: I should make it absolutely clear that I do not think that that is an appropriate way to teach that. I agree with some of what you said, and it transfers to some other parts of what the Transferor Representatives' Council said last week. The Christian ethos of a school is broad and, for the most part, is a soft touch element of the school's ethics. It is not equivalent to a church environment. I am not saying that there are not bad examples out there, but it is about having a positive learning experience. Most schools will have a degree of pragmatism in how they deal with issues whilst acknowledging and referring to their ethos. It is important to realise that and that we are not talking about indoctrinating people or sending them to churches; we are talking about the wide ethos of a school. I thought that that was a good point that you made about that.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): We are running short on time. There is time for a quick one to wrap up.

Ms Nelson: When you talk about balance in the moral positions in the classroom, you see that there are many subjects in school where there is debate. For RSE specifically, it is about providing factual information to make young people have informed choices, and we advocate that. It is not about telling a young person what they should do or where they should go to access an abortion. That is not what we are advocating at all. It is about providing information to make informed choices, and that should apply to everyone in school.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): Thank you. I do not have any other indication. Thank you for your time and the evidence session. It has been great to hear from you. As with all the other evidence sessions, we will take all that and feed it into our final report. Thank you.

Ms Moore: Thank you.

Ms Nelson: Thank you.