Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): We are joined by Andrew Scott, the director of collaborative education and youth in the Department of Education, and Maurice Girvin, the head of the Department's Irish-medium and integrated education team. Thank you for being here today and giving of your time. I invite you to make an opening presentation, after which we will have questions and answers.

Mr Andrew Scott (Department of Education): Thank you, Chair, for the invitation to provide oral evidence to the Committee on the Irish-medium Education (Workforce Plan) Bill. I am the director of collaborative education and youth in the Department, and I have responsibility for policy relating to Irish-medium education (IME).

At the outset, it may be helpful to explain my focus today. I appreciate that the Committee is keen to explore the detail of the Bill. However, given relatively recent engagement between the Department, the Office of the Legislative Council (OLC) and the Departmental Solicitor's Office (DSO), that work is still at an early and evolving stage. As such, my remarks today are intended to focus primarily on the policy context and operational implications of the Bill for the Department rather than on detailed legal or drafting analysis. However, I may be in a position to provide more specific evidence, including potential areas for amendment, following further engagement with OLC and DSO in the coming weeks.

This afternoon, I intend to provide some contextual information to support the Committee's scrutiny of the Bill. I will briefly reflect on what the Bill proposes, outline the wider policy and statutory context and then describe the work that the Department is currently taking forward on Irish-medium issues, particularly through the development of an Irish-medium education strategy. I will do so while being mindful that much of that work remains under development.

The Bill seeks to place a statutory duty on the Department to prepare, publish and regularly update a workforce plan that is specific to Irish-medium education. It sets out defined time frames for producing that plan, for consulting with named stakeholders and for reporting to the Assembly on implementation. The Department recognises that workforce pressures in Irish-medium education are long-standing and well evidenced. Those include challenges around recruitment, retention, workload, leadership capacity and access to specialist support for children and young people with special educational needs. Those issues have been highlighted through research, consultation exercises and direct engagement with practitioners over several years. While some of those matters are shared across various school types, some aspects are specific to Irish-medium education.

It is also important to place the Bill within the existing statutory framework. The Department already holds a statutory duty under article 89 of the Education (Northern Ireland) Order 1998:

The Bill seeks to go beyond that duty, specifically proposing a formal statutory framework for workforce planning and reporting. At present, the Department is progressing the development of a dedicated Irish-medium education strategy. Workforce issues are a central pillar of that work, and, rather than sitting in isolation, they are developed through established co-design arrangements. In particular, the Irish-medium strategy working group (IMSWG) has been meeting regularly to examine workforce matters in depth. The working group includes representation from various stakeholders, including Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta (CnaG), the Education Authority (EA), the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools (CCMS), the Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment (CCEA), the Controlled Schools’ Support Council (CSSC), Altram, Foras na Gaeilge (FnaG) and Irish-medium principals.

Pillar 2 of that work focuses specifically on educator recruitment and retention. Between October 2025 and February of this year, four dedicated working group meetings were held on that theme alone, along with an additional session involving front-line practitioners. That work has been evidence-led and is drawn on CnaG workforce research, discussions with IME representatives through the working group and the lived experience of teachers and school leaders. Across that evidence base, the group repeatedly identified acute recruitment pressures in certain phases and subjects, high attrition among newly qualified Irish-medium teachers and significant workload pressures linked to emerging pedagogy and resource development. The working group also engaged directly with higher education providers, including a detailed session in February of this year with St Mary's University College. That discussion examined initial teacher education pathways, postgraduate provision, language-immersion demands on students, placement pressures and attrition. It directly shaped the emerging thinking around early immersion experience and post-qualification support.

The pillar-2 work has now progressed beyond diagnosis towards the development of a structured set of potential strategic actions. Those span areas such as workforce intelligence and planning, recruitment pathways, early career support, classroom assistant roles, professional learning, workload-reduction approaches and system-level enablers. However, I want to be clear to the Committee that the work is still in draft form. It is subject to further development, governance processes and ministerial consideration as part of an overall Irish-medium education strategy. As a result of the valuable co-design approach and the breadth of the strategy, the time frame for completion is anticipated to be mid-2027.

Alongside the strategic work, the Department is taking a range of practical steps on the Irish-medium workforce. Those include protecting initial teacher education places for Irish-medium education, prioritising Irish-medium education in teacher-training bursary schemes and working with the Education Authority to explore workload-reduction approaches, including the use of digital and AI-supported tools where appropriate.

The position outlined by the Minister at the Second Stage debate was that, given that ongoing work, such a Bill is unnecessary. There is also the potential for unintended impacts across the complex education landscape as Irish-medium education cuts across various school sectors and employers. Furthermore, it is a concern that the small team that Maurice leads, which is working on the strategy, will be diverted to work associated with the Bill as it makes its passage. That will have potential implications for the pace and capacity of the wider strategy delivery.

In financial terms, the Bill's explanatory and financial memorandum reflects departmental estimates that the administrative requirements arising from the Bill would involve ongoing costs in the region of £26,000 to £44,000 a year, which would largely be staff costs. Any wider workforce interventions flowing from future plans would require separate policy development and funding decisions. The Bill will not guarantee the availability of funding.

On the Bill itself, initial consideration, informed by engagement with DSO and OLC, indicates that it may benefit from some technical and tidying amendments on, for example, the definition of "workforce" and to ensure consistency of terms throughout. At present, only teachers are referred to as consultees. There could be an amendment for the placement of duties on the Department rather than on the Minister, and on small things such as changing "consult with" to "consult".

There may be a need to consider broader matters, including how the Bill is intended to operate across existing sectors. Irish-medium education does not constitute a school-management type in its own right; rather, it spans a number of management types, including maintained, other maintained and controlled schools. Greater clarity may, therefore, be needed on how workforce planning and reporting obligations would apply consistently across those different governance and employing-authority arrangements. Also, potential cross-cutting impacts, such as those on the Department of Health and the Department for the Economy, may need to be considered, along with the feasibility of the time frames for the plan and the reports, to ensure that we achieve the intentions of the Bill.

I stress that those examples are not intended to change the underlying intention or policy objective of the Bill but to highlight technical and operational considerations that may need to be addressed to ensure that the Bill can be implemented effectively, if it is the will of the Assembly to implement it.

Although the departmental position on the need for the legislation is clear, the Department is willing to engage further with the Bill sponsor and the Committee on such matters as the Bill progresses, if that would be helpful.

I hope that that interview, or that overview, rather — it has felt like an interview — has helped to situate the Bill in the wider context of ongoing work on Irish-medium education and its workforce. I am very happy to expand on any of those points or to answer questions from the Committee. Difficult questions to Maurice, please.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): That would have been quite a preamble to an interview. [Laughter.]

Thank you for that introduction, Andrew. I was pleased to hear you so clearly acknowledge the specific challenges that exist in Irish-medium education, as there was discussion from some sections of the Assembly, at the Bill's Second Stage, that perhaps sought to minimise those. Anyone who has visited an Irish-medium school knows that there are particular challenges that go beyond it being difficult to recruit STEM teachers. We know that that is difficult across the whole education sector. It is important to have on record the Department's clear acknowledgement of the particular challenges that affect the Irish-medium sector. Given that acknowledgement, has a workforce plan ever been developed? I understand that there is live work on a strategy, but has a plan ever been put in place, at departmental level, specifically to address those challenges?

Mr Scott: Not to my knowledge, Chair. There are various initiatives that have looked across the wider workforce, and there is ongoing work specifically on the review of teacher workload. Some of the actions that will be taken on the review of workload generally will have a positive impact on all sectors, including on the Irish-medium sector. I do not believe, however, that there has been a specific Irish-medium workforce strategy or plan.

Mr Maurice Girvin (Department of Education): This is the first strategy.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): Notwithstanding the fact that the Department juggles different priorities, is there an acceptance, at departmental level, that, in keeping with the statutory duty relating to Irish-medium education, it would be reasonable that it would produce a workforce plan for Irish-medium education?

Mr Scott: A Department should also be conscious of the impact that its workforce has across all sectors, including the Irish-medium sector. Yes, I do think that that is part of its responsibilities. Setting aside and going beyond the legal duties, it is a moral responsibility of all Departments to look after and develop its workforce.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): To be clear on the specifics of the particular statutory duty that relates to Irish-medium education, does the Department accept that it is a reasonable proposition to develop a workforce plan for that sector?

Mr Scott: The rationale for my talking through the ongoing work of the Department is that we recognise the fact that there are challenges, some of which are specific to Irish-medium education. A lot of those either directly relate to workforce or impact on workforce. Yes, we recognise the need to do more and to do better, which is why the strategy has come about.

Mr Girvin: The strategy has seven key pillars, and that has been identified as being one of the key pillars. In fact, it is one of the most significant pillars.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): OK. I have one other question on the basis of that being a key pillar in the strategy. It has been suggested that there is concern that, if the Bill were to pass, it might disrupt some of that work or divert officials away from it. If it is a key pillar, however, is there an argument that the Bill complements the work of the strategy?

Mr Scott: It is one of seven pillars, Chair. Being here today, preparing to give evidence to the Committee and providing advice as the Bill makes its passage through the Assembly is a responsibility of the machinery of government in any case, but it diverts a small team away from the delivery of the strategy as a whole, so it is a risk, and it would be remiss of me not to state that.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): There is nothing else from me, at the minute. Any other questions that I have would be around some of the more technical stuff in the clauses such as who should be consulted and SEN being something that could be highlighted in more detail.

Mr Sheehan: Do you accept, Andrew, that Irish-medium education operates in a context distinct from other parts of the education system because of its immersive nature?

Mr Scott: I agree that there are going to be factors specific to Irish-medium education, but it sits within a wider ecosystem as well, so some factors will be consistent and some unique.

Mr Sheehan: Do you accept, therefore, that there is a much smaller recruitment pool when it comes to Irish-medium education?

Mr Scott: Yes.

Mr Sheehan: Do you accept, therefore, that the one-size-fits-all model should not be applied to the Irish-medium sector?

Mr Scott: A one-size-fits-all model should not apply across the board. Any recruitment or initiative should flex to meet the specific needs of any sector, Irish-medium or other.

Mr Sheehan: OK; fair enough. Do you accept that the workforce challenges in the Irish-medium sector extend beyond teachers and specialist teachers and include support staff for children with SEN, classroom assistants, early years staff, leadership roles, educational psychologists and all of that, and that has been known about for a long time?

Mr Scott: Yes.

Mr Sheehan: Can you outline what specific planning the Department is already doing to deal with those issues and roles in the Irish-medium sector that have been highlighted?

Mr Scott: Up to a point. If we were a year down the line and I was coming to the Committee, I would be in a position to say, "Here are the things that are in the strategy. Here's what's going to be taken forward". As that strategy is still in development, I am not in a position to say, "Here's a list of 10 actions that will be taken forward". The strategy is still in its formative stages. What I can do is ask Maurice to outline the workforce aspects that have come out that I would expect will feature in the plan.

Mr Girvin: The working group identified seven or eight things in that pillar that the Department is looking to take forward. Those include workforce intelligence and having a baseline — a well-understood position — that does not currently exist. There is a lot of research and anecdotal evidence, but we need to have a proper baseline. Another one is alternative recruitment pathways for teachers and classroom assistants. You said that it was not just about teaching; it is a whole workforce issue, particularly classroom assistants. That is about having alternative pathways for classroom assistants to get into working in schools. Getting student teachers into the workforce and keeping them — attrition rates are quite high — is about providing support in the early years of their development. It is also about supporting the pedagogy of delivery in an immersive setting and about resources. The seven pillars overlap because recruitment and retention are impacted on by resources and other things.

Mr Sheehan: I have spoken to quite a number of principals in the Irish-medium sector, and every one of them thinks that the Bill would complement the strategy. Do you accept that?

Mr Girvin: I think that, without the Bill, things will progress anyway.

Mr Sheehan: Do you? Right, OK.

Mr Girvin: Yes. Many of the things that are being done will be —.

Mr Sheehan: Andrew said that the Bill might actually delay the strategy.

Mr Girvin: It is taking away from a small team to prepare from the likes of today, but —.

Mr Sheehan: Where does the obligation to encourage and facilitate Irish-medium education come in if a relatively short Bill passing through now would delay the strategy? The statutory duty to encourage and facilitate is there for a reason, and that reason has been outlined clearly in the High Court. What you are telling us today is that that might be delayed because you have only a small staff; that the Minister cannot appoint a number of other people to work on that, which would be fulfilling his statutory obligation.

Mr Scott: It is important to say that we have outlined what is already going on in the Department that will, hopefully, meet the intentions of the Bill and go further. What I am highlighting is the fact that an opportunity cost comes when a team is diverted and is spending time on legislation. Whether that is driven by the Department or otherwise, it has a risk of potentially impacting on other work. I am not saying that the strategy will be delayed: I am just saying that it provides a risk.

Mr Sheehan: I understand that, Andrew. I am asking you where the statutory duty comes in, in the work that is going on in the Department. If another bit of work comes in on another aspect of Irish-medium education, and staff are diverted and there is no backfilling, it does not sound to me as though a statutory obligation is being fulfilled there.

Mr Scott: Chair, I would —.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): Please respond briefly on that.

Mr Scott: I suggest that, across all the areas here, there is very little that does not have a statutory backing, and the Department is trying to manage competing demands and priorities. The Department is progressing the strategy because it recognises the duty that is there and, more importantly, the need that exists in the sector.

Mr Sheehan: That duty exists everywhere. You have to have some sort of workforce plan for every aspect of the education system. However, you have already accepted, at the start of my questioning, that Irish medium is in a distinct context and there is a statutory obligation.

Mr Scott: Yes, and that is why we are progressing with the strategy work to date.

Mr Sheehan: I have just one last question. It is important.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): We will see how long it takes to answer.

Mr Sheehan: Do you accept that there are high levels of distrust, not just within the Irish-medium sector and the Irish language community but among broader sections of the community, that this Minister and the DUP in general are hostile to the Irish language?

Mr Scott: I cannot speak for people across the sector or for the Minister. I know that the Minister, at Second Stage, talked about his support directly for Irish medium. In some of the things that I have outlined today, I have talked about initiatives that the Minister has taken forward.

Mr Sheehan: I am not asking you to speak for the sector or for the Minister. I am asking you whether you are aware that that distrust exists because of the hostility that has been shown by the DUP to the Irish language and Irish medium. [Inaudible.]

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): David, through the Chair.

Mr Sheehan: David, sit there and mind your own business.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): Deputy Chair —.

Mr Brooks: Calm you down.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): Deputy Chair, I ask that remarks be conducted through the Chair. David, I will certainly bring you in for a contribution when it is appropriate. Andrew, answer the question briefly. We need to move on in the interests of time.

Mr Scott: Yes. There will be a range of views across the sector on the level of support and trust.

Mr Sheehan: I am not asking you that. I am asking whether you are aware that that hostility exists.

Mr Scott: I suspect that there is a range of views, including hostility, but I —.

Mr Sheehan: You are sitting here gaslighting now, Andrew.

Mr Scott: No.

Mr Brooks: This is a political point, Chair.

Mr Sheehan: You are gaslighting here.

Mr Scott: Chair, I do not agree.

Mr Sheehan: David, mind your own business.

Mr Brooks: Calm yourself.

Mr Scott: I am trying to answer the question, Chair.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): Deputy Chair —.

Mr Sheehan: You are gaslighting here.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): Deputy Chair, I need to bring some order.

Mr Sheehan: You well know of the hostility that the DUP has to —.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): Deputy Chair, give me a chance to speak. David, I have already asked for remarks to be conducted through the Chair. I will bring you in to contribute on this item when it is appropriate. Deputy Chair, I ask you to give the witness the opportunity to answer the question.

Mr Sheehan: Well, ask him not to gaslight us, Chair.

Mr Scott: Chair, thank you. I will give my evidence, and that can be considered by the Committee as it sees fit. My interpretation of the situation is this: I know that there is a range of views across the sector on the level of buy-in from those who are involved, and we are casting the net wide —.

Mr Sheehan: The range of views across what sector?

Mr Scott: Across the Irish-medium sector.

Mr Sheehan: No, there is not a range of views.

Mr Scott: Chair —.

Mr Sheehan: There is one clear view across the sector, and that is that the DUP is hostile not just to Irish-medium education and the Irish language but to anything connected to Irish culture.

Mr Scott: Chair, I cannot get into the politics of that. What I will do —

Mr Sheehan: I am not asking you to get into the politics.

Mr Scott: — is to add to my answer: I have outlined the process being gone through with the strategy. It has been inclusive, and a lot of people have been engaging across the Irish-medium sector on this. I would not present them or suggest that they have a hostile attitude towards it. That is me staying outside the politics on it, Chair.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): We will draw that section of the evidence session to close. I will just highlight for members that, from a witness's perspective, it is entirely up to them whether they feel that they are able to answer a question. It is not for me to direct them as to whether they can. However, it is important that we give witnesses the opportunity to finish their remarks. I will always give a member the opportunity to come back in to respond to that. It helps the conduct of the meeting if we can approach things in that way.

Cathy, you had indicated that you want to ask a question.

Mrs Mason: Andrew, you mentioned the forthcoming strategy that you are working on. I know that you mentioned the wider context of the statutory duty, but can you confirm that that strategy is non-statutory? It is not a legislative process: it is non-statutory.

Mr Scott: The statutory duty is not specific enough that it requires us to produce a strategy; so, yes, it is not outlined specifically on the statute books.

Mrs Mason: So, there is no legal requirement for the Department to publish the strategy or to update it within a fixed time frame. You mentioned mid-2027, but there is no legal duty for it to be delivered by that stage.

Mr Scott: Not at present.

Mrs Mason: You can see how there might be mistrust there, and it is not just in the current Minister but in any Minister who comes behind. If it is not done by 2027, there is no legal duty for it to continue. The Bill makes it statutory that it has to continue.

With regard to the childcare strategy, I have heard it before and been here before, as have many others. I have heard officials say that workforce is the key issue. Every meeting that we have about childcare and early years is always about workforce. It is always the same.

We were told that the childcare strategy will be a key pillar — I wrote the word "pillar" down, because I have heard that before as well. It includes workforce as a pillar, but there are no objectives, no targets and no actual output on how we are going to get and improve the workforce. It is a small section. We are also hearing that it is all dependent on funding. Will your strategy be exactly the same?

Mr Scott: The intention is to have a strategy that is worthwhile in the production of it, so I cannot speak for —.

Mrs Mason: The childcare strategy was exactly the same, Andrew.

Mr Scott: I cannot speak for others who have come before. We are here because we want to make a difference. We want to achieve the same end as what is intended in the Bill right across the areas.

It is no secret that there are budget challenges across the public sector and in education specifically. There is a challenge in that we need to resource whatever comes out of the strategy or whatever comes out of the obligations of a Bill and a plan on the back of that. It will require resource to make those things happen. That will influence the extent and the pace at which those things are delivered.

Mrs Mason: In fact, you are saying that it is down to the Minister's priorities.

Mr Scott: That is the same right across all Departments. If the Bill goes through, the production of the plan does not guarantee funding.

Mrs Mason: Again, to go back to Pat's point, you can see how there is a level of distrust that it will not be prioritised by a DUP Minister.

Mr Scott: I can understand the feelings and concern that are there. There is an approaching election, and Ministers' portfolios will change. In saying that, you are progressing with a strategy at the moment under a DUP Minister. Are different Ministers in their portfolios going to take away the development of an Irish-medium strategy? I am not sure whether that is a massive risk, but I can understand the concern that may be there.

Mrs Mason: Can you understand that the Bill will ensure that that is not a risk?

Mr Scott: The Bill would require the production of plans and reports against those. It would not take away the risks around funding. It would not guarantee the delivery of the wider strategy. It would require the production of a plan for the workforce specifically.

Mrs Mason: And to report back on that as well?

Mr Scott: Yes.

Mr Brooks: I will not take you down the line of asking you to comment on political parties' viewpoints on the Irish language and get into a political row. There is an attempt to build a narrative here across multiple issues —.

Mr Sheehan: We do not need to build it. It is already there, David.

Mr Brooks: You are trying very hard.

The Minister has outlined in the Chamber on a number of occasions, but particularly when we discussed the Bill, that he has approved proposals for nurseries and new builds in the Irish-medium sector. He has visited Irish language schools. In fact, when I think back, one of his first visits was to an Irish-medium school. I remember him holding a hurley — I am not sure whether it is called a bat or a stick or what you call a hurley stick.

Mr Sheehan: It is a hurley. Just call it a hurley or a hurl.

Mr Brooks: Maurice, you are head of the Irish-medium education unit. Have you encountered a Minister who is hostile to the Irish-medium sector?

Mr Scott: That is not my experience.

Mr Brooks: Thank you. As the Minister has laid out, there is no engagement from across the table with the facts and what is being done, rather than perception, which is largely built and fuelled by Sinn Féin's rhetoric.

Mr Baker: That was a quick answer to that one. The Department makes political statements. Just before you came in, your officials and your colleague said that my Bill could be harmful to Education because of the funding for that. That is a political statement, in my view. I put that on the record.

The Bill does not prescribe any specific policy interventions. It just puts a duty on the Department to plan and report. It is that simple. That is the narrow intent of the policy. It is hard to listen to you say that this will have an impact on your strategy. You are dancing on the head of a pin. Will you explain that a wee bit more? You cannot come here and say, "We're going to take away from a small team", even in the context of preparing for today. That did not sound good to me. It did not sound like a priority. How many meetings are you having with the sector? How many meetings on the strategy have taken place so far?

Mr Girvin: We have had four working group meetings and one steering group meeting on accommodation sustainability and five meetings on educator recruitment and retention. That is as far as we have got. We have a second steering group meeting coming up soon.

Mr Baker: Over how long?

Mr Girvin: About six or seven months.

Mr Baker: That is not a lot of meetings in that time.

Mr Girvin: Those are the key meetings. We have had lots of additional meetings in preparation for those meetings.

Mr Baker: Yes, but do you see my point? There is no duplication. The Bill will not duplicate anything in your strategy.

Mr Scott: That is to be confirmed. It depends on the detail. If the consultation and engagement that we have had in the development of the strategy is suffice in meeting the legislative requirement, there will be less duplication there. Obviously, there are obligations with regard to producing plans and reporting.

Mr Baker: It asks for a plan and report. That is the primary focus of the Bill.

Mr Scott: Yes.

Mr Baker: It sounds as though you have come in to dance on the head of a pin. I feel for you: you are having to come in to sell an argument for a Minister who is, in my opinion, extremely hostile. Sometimes, he stands in the Chamber and talks about meeting the Irish-medium sector as if that is an endorsement of the sector. It is not: participation is not an endorsement. Thank you.

Mrs Guy: I have a boring question, which seems like an anticlimax now. I should have asked this question last week, when it came up in the Research and Information Service (RaISe) briefing, but I did not. It is on the collection of the data that would be required to deliver on this. You would need a fair amount of data. Have you thought about that? It would be needed anyway, in the context of the strategy, so it would feed into work on the workforce.

Mr Scott: Those are things that we are planning to do anyway. One of the pillars looks at that. We need to have better intelligence on and insight into what is happening across the sector, what is not happening and where the gaps are that we need to target, be that in the workforce or other areas. That is something that we need to address in any case.

Mrs Guy: You have not yet, but it is something that will form part of the strategy.

Mr Scott: Yes.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): No other members have indicated that they wish to ask a question. Thank you for your time. There will probably be some things that we will want to come back to you on. At the start, you highlighted an interest in working with the Committee to ensure that we get things such as the consultee list right. There might be issues that the Committee will want to pick up.

Finally, do you know when you will have engagement with the OLC or Departmental Solicitor's Office on the drafting?

Mr Scott: We had an initial meeting, last week. When the Bill was introduced, we got in touch with them to seek advice. We received initial written advice and then met them last week. I hope that we will have a more substantive opinion from them on this side of the summer.

The Chairperson (Mr Mathison): That would be helpful, because the Committee hopes to run a fairly short Committee Stage, given that it is a short Bill and given the fact that we are juggling other legislative priorities. We would welcome hearing from you on that as soon as possible. Thank you both for your time.