Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Chairperson (Ms Finnegan): I welcome the officials from the Department of Education: Margaret Rose McNaughton, director of transport and food in schools, and Shirley Sweeney, deputy director of teaching and learning experience. Please brief the Committee.

Ms Margaret Rose McNaughton (Department of Education): Thank you for giving us the opportunity to come along today. The Committee has received our written briefing. I hope that members have found that helpful.

I will briefly give some context for the School Uniforms (Guidelines and Allowances) Act (Northern Ireland) 2026, which came into operation on 19 February 2026. The Committee will be aware that it is for a school to decide whether it wants to have a school uniform. School uniforms are not compulsory. Since the School Uniforms Act came into operation, however, if a heavily grant-aided or independent primary or post-primary school decides to have a uniform, their school uniform policy must adhere to the school uniforms guidelines. That is not optional.

The Minister introduced the School Uniforms Act to address increasing concerns about the cost of school uniforms. The Act and associated guidelines require uniform policies to address comfort and practicality; to set out a rationale for the uniform choices, especially if a branded item is being asked for by a school; to provide cost information, including the widest range of suppliers from which uniforms can be bought; and to provide a value-for-money statement explaining the rationale and the cost benefit for parents, if a school has entered into a single-supplier or limited-supplier agreement. Schools must publish a range of specific information on their website, including the outcome of the consultation that must take place with all parents and pupils. There are rights of complaint to the Department of Education, should anyone be concerned that a school is not adhering to the full requirements.

The Department has never dictated the detail of items to be included in school uniform policy. That approach has been applied consistently in the statutory guidelines. We respect the autonomy of schools to determine their uniform requirements in line with the statutory guidelines, so details such as whether trousers, tracksuits, leggings or shorts are to be specified in a uniform policy have not been included to date. What has been included and is clearly set out in the statutory guidelines is the requirement for all human rights and equality law to be followed when a school determines its uniform policy. That clearly includes all gender rights.

The guidelines also require uniform adaptations to be made that do not generate additional costs for parents. For example, pupils with sensory issues may need different materials or may struggle with wearing button-up shirts or blouses. If pupils feel more comfortable in trousers, the guidelines fully support the adaptation of uniform policies to enable that. Schools need to address any such concerns and to make all reasonable adjustments. That is an important point: schools, rather than legislation specifying one uniform item in particular, are best placed to meet the individual needs of pupils in their classrooms, including when it comes to uniform. As I have said, however, all parents and pupils must be consulted on the uniform policy, and the outcome of that consultation must be published. When you take those requirements into the current guidelines as a whole on what schools must do, you can clearly see how the wearing of trousers is supported and already covered.

That having been said, the Minister has heard the voices of children and young people, particularly girls, and he took the decision to make it absolutely clear in the guidelines that trousers are to be provided as an option. Therefore, he has updated the school uniform guidelines for the 2027-28 school year to include the specific requirement that girls are to be permitted to wear trousers as part of their uniform, including for PE and games. In doing so, he has tried to make it as clear as possible to all schools that that is no longer for them to decide: it is absolutely clear that they must give an option for trousers to be part of a school uniform policy.

We are here to talk about the specifics of the School Uniforms (Trousers) Bill. I think that I have highlighted some areas of concern that we have with it. I will talk through those a bit more, and, Shirley, you can come in with some of the other technical aspects of it.

One of the key concerns is that the Bill places a statement that

at the very start of the School Uniforms (Guidelines and Allowances) Act. It is relevant to bear in mind that the Act states that its purpose is:

The Act is written as a cohesive piece, including how the amendments that were made to it at Consideration Stage were incorporated at Further Consideration Stage. It sets out duties in relation to guidelines about school uniform policies, including what they need to cover; duties on the Department to issue the guidelines; and duties on schools to adhere to them. The entire Act is framed around what must be done in relation to guidelines about school uniform policies, and that is how it was drafted. Therefore, the statement in the Bill is not consistent with that drafting and provides no proper link to uniform policies.

We have taken legal advice on the Bill, and that advice agrees with our analysis. The legal advice is that the duty is on the Department to issue and on schools to adhere to guidelines. Because of how it is drafted, the Bill does not neatly apply to that statement. There is no clarity about how it sits with the section 8 power for the Department to direct, so, in practice, the Bill does not place responsibility for enforcement or dealing with failure to comply anywhere. It does not clearly identify who is responsible for enforcement or who is answerable in any proceedings. We are clear that we do not think that that statement is needed to achieve the Bill's intent. We are also clear that it does not sit appropriately at the outset of the Act. The fundamental point is that we do not think that there is any need for it and that it creates uncertainty in how the different legal rules operate together or do not operate together, as the case may be. That was a key concern.

We also have concerns, which we have highlighted in our written briefing, about some of the terminology used. One of those is "other leg coverings". We considered that to be open to misinterpretation, not least if a pupil decided that jeans, leg warmers or tights, for example, could constitute leg coverings. We are really concerned that we have to be absolutely clear about what we mean by "other leg coverings". I am sure that, in drafting the Bill, it was not the intention of the Committee that jeans or leg warmers would be permitted, but that is why it is so important that the meaning of any terminology that we use is clear and that we provide a definition for it. Every piece of legislation really needs to be clear from the outset.

If the aim is to enable tracksuit bottoms or leggings to be worn during PE and games, it is relevant that the normal definition of trousers already covers, for example, short trousers or tracksuit bottoms. Therefore, it would be better if the Bill were to state that guidelines should include provision for school uniform policies to include options allowing all pupils to wear trousers, insofar as is appropriate by reference to any subjects that they might be undertaking. Using language that is open to interpretation creates risks of unintended consequences, particularly for schools.

If a child decides that they want to wear a pair of jeans or if a parent decides that they want their child to wear a pair of jeans — unlikely, I know — what can a school do about that? All that will fall to schools to manage in the first instance. We stress the need for clear terminology in the Bill.

We are not clear why a requirement to publish the guidelines is in the legislation. The guidelines are issued by way of a link that takes readers to a page on the Department's website, where they are published, so that provision seems unnecessary to us. If there is a requirement to publish and they are to be placed in legislation, our legal advice is that it would be neater in drafting terms for them to be incorporated into the existing section 15 of the Act, which requires the Department to lay the guidelines before the Assembly

The transitional and commencement arrangements that the Bill sets out are unnecessarily complicated and confusing. The Bill requires the Department to revise and reissue the current guidelines to provide for school uniform trousers by 1 August 2027. However, clause 1, which is the substantive requirement in relation to trousers, only commences on 1 August 2027. Our legal advice is that it would be more straightforward to have the clause 1 requirements of the Bill come into operation on the day after Royal Assent, in line with all the other clauses. Also, that would be too late for the 2027-28 school year. That has now been addressed by the Minister's update to the guidelines, which will apply to the 2027-28 school year. That is because schools need time to consult parents and pupils. I cannot stress enough how important that consultation is: school uniform policies need to be developed with parents and young people. Young people are the ones who will wear the uniforms, and they need to be comfortable with what is being decided for them.

We are keen to stress to schools the importance of consultation, and we are looking at that closely as part of our monitoring. Now that the Minister has acted, it is clear and explicit to schools that all uniform policies are required to provide for girls to be allowed to wear trousers, including for PE and games. That is now in the guidelines.

There are technical and drafting matters that need to be addressed in the current Bill. There should not be a statement about trousers at the start of the School Uniforms Act, because it adds nothing legislatively and does not fit with the structure and flow of the Act. We need to consider the terminology of leg coverings. Also, we believe that there is no need to require the publication of guidelines. However, if they are to be retained, they should be incorporated into section 15 of the School Uniforms Act and not necessarily placed in a different section. The transitional and commencement arrangements that I spoke about really should come into operation on the day after the Bill receives Royal Assent.

I hope that you found that useful. We are happy to answer any questions that you might have.

The Chairperson (Ms Finnegan): Thank you for that. You said that you would like to have your own consultation: has the Department of Education fed into this Committee's consultation and the Education Committee's consultation? A huge number of people responded in favour. I do not have the precise figure, but it was around 97%. You heard from the Youth Assembly as well. You mentioned the people from whom you would like to get feedback in your consultation, but have you considered our consultation?

Ms McNaughton: When I talk about consultation, I am talking about the consultation that schools must have with parents and pupils when developing their uniform policies. Schools should be looking at their policies for the 2027-28 year now, because they have to get their prospectuses ready for November/December. They should be looking now at their school uniform policy and starting the consultation process with parents and pupils to see what their uniform requirements should be for the 2027-28 academic year. That is the consultation that I am talking about. We are really keen that schools carry out meaningful consultation with parents and pupils. I am not sure what you mean by —.

The Chairperson (Ms Finnegan): Did you read the consultation and the feedback on our consultation? If this were to be brought into primary legislation and if those discussions were to happen, girls would not have to ask for permission to wear trousers. That would be a part of that consultation.

Ms McNaughton: Now that the guidelines have been amended, nobody has to ask for permission. Every school must provide the option. When developing their school uniform policy, there has to be an option for trousers in there. Whether girls choose to wear trousers is entirely up to them, but the option must be there. In the same way as there is the option to wear a skirt or pinafore in a school, there now has to be the option to wear trousers.

The Chairperson (Ms Finnegan): OK. You say that the Bill is not sufficiently clear in its language or structure and that it generates risk to schools through the real-world outworkings: can you give a practical example of the possible risk to schools through the Bill's real-world outworkings?

Ms McNaughton: What we are really concerned about is the definition of "leg coverings". I do not think for one minute that girls will wear a pair of jeans or decide to wear a pair of tights for PE, but there is always that risk. If you are not absolutely clear about what you mean or what is allowed for PE or games, it puts the school in a really difficult position. If there is no definition of leg coverings, you can decide for yourself what they are. They will cover both legs, yes, but we do not know what they will be.

Mrs Shirley Sweeney (Department of Education): On the structure point, Chair, that is about the placement of the statement:

That sits outside the structure of how the Act has been written. The Act is written — this is with full respect to the expert drafters; they are not departmental officials — so that there are duties on the Department to issue guidelines and duties on the managers of schools — principals, proprietors, boards of governors — to adhere to those guidelines. There are other duties around affordability, comfort and practicality — what the guidelines must cover. That structure is what we are referring to in how the Act works, and it works in legal terms.

Legally, it is coherent if we change and amend the guidelines, which is what the Minister has done. The guidelines now explicitly require every school uniform policy to allow the wearing of trousers. There is no requirement for girls to ask to wear trousers. That is in every school uniform policy. The Department is monitoring and will continue to monitor all that. We will actively look to see whether anything that is in the guidelines is in the policy. There is a structure for enforceability under section 8 of the Act.

The Chairperson (Ms Finnegan): OK. I will open it to other members. I could ask questions all day.

Ms Sheerin: Thanks to you both for coming in this afternoon. I have a lot of questions on your presentation. First, on the problems that you see with slotting this new legislation into the legislation that came into effect in February, can you explain or provide any rationale for why, given that the responses to the public consultation were overwhelmingly in favour of including provision for the wearing of trousers across all schools, that was not written into the original Bill?

Ms McNaughton: As I said, we did not want to dictate to schools what their uniform had to look like by saying, "That is the design of your uniform". We were clear and the Minister has been clear that there were never any barriers to schools allowing girls to wear trousers if that was part of their uniform policy and if, during consultation, the girls were adamant that they wanted trousers to be part of that policy. Many schools allow trousers as part of their policy.

Ms Sheerin: Sorry, I do not want to cut across you, but, in our previous evidence session, we heard testimony from young people who know of children who have not been allowed to wear trousers. If there was never any barrier, why did the Minister have to do a U-turn last week to say that he is now putting it into the guidelines?

Ms McNaughton: He has heard the concerns of young people and decided to make it absolutely clear to schools that there has to be that option in their school uniform policy now.

Do you want to add anything, Shirley?

Ms Sheerin: Would it have been easier to do that six months ago when the Minister was bringing new legislation to the House? The feedback at that time was exactly the same as it is now: young girls who were being told that they could not wear trousers were demanding to wear trousers, and they felt excluded from school because they were made fun of when they wore trousers.

Mrs Sweeney: The starting point has been to look at the balance. The Minister has said consistently that he has seen that there is a balance to be struck between the autonomy of schools, which are best placed to determine their uniforms, and the guidelines, which, as Margaret Rose said, include all equality and human rights legislation, all reasonable adaptations and the consultation process. Pupils should not be asked to come forward to take part in a big consultation, but it should ask, "If the uniform policy were to include or not include this, how would that meet your needs?".

Taken as a whole, the approach taken with the guidelines introduced in February — bear in mind that it is the first year of them and that there have never been statutory guidelines before — was to allow schools an opportunity to show that they can strike that balance. We have monitored that, however, and the Minister has been out in schools and heard the reality that you just referred to and that the Youth Assembly Members in your previous session described. That is not to take away from any of the great practice that exists in schools, but there are schools that do not allow the option to wear trousers, although that is important to pupils, and there is no point in pretending otherwise. The Minister has heard how difficult and demeaning it can feel to girls to have to ask the question. That is why the guidelines have been amended. That goes back to the point —.

Ms Sheerin: I really struggle with that, because that was also the case six months ago. We are all sitting on an Ad Hoc Committee that did not need to exist. That feedback was exactly the same six months ago. I am not an expert in the drafting of legislation, but you have outlined articulately your concerns with slotting this into legislation that is only six months old. I am trying to understand why it could not have been done six months ago, which would have saved all this time, effort and resource. Is there a reason why that was not done? You said that the Minister has listened, but was he not listening six months ago? What changed? I do not understand.

Mrs Sweeney: Nothing —.

Ms Sheerin: I cannot understand where anything has changed, because the feedback to our consultation was exactly the same as the consultation feedback that the Committee for Education received months ago.

Mrs Sweeney: The Minister's position has been consistent: there is a balance to be struck, and we give the schools the opportunity to strike that balance. If they do not, the Act that came into operation has, as the Minister has said consistently, all the powers that could be needed when it comes to affordability, comfort, practicality, equality and human rights. Those powers are in the Act, so there is no need to amend —.

Ms Sheerin: But now there is a need, is there?

Mrs Sweeney: There is no need to amend the legislation. The powers are there, and the Minister, by amending the guidelines straight away, has proved that he is prepared to use them. They will be living guidelines that will be amended every year.

Ms Sheerin: What is the penalty for a school that does not implement that guideline?

Mrs Sweeney: As I said, the Department will monitor it and say, "Here are the requirements of the guidelines", and it will engage with any school that is not adhering to the guidelines. An explicit duty in the Act is that school managers — principals and boards of governors — "must adhere". That is not loose or ambivalent wording, and it is not optional: they must adhere to the guidelines. What is in the guidelines must therefore be adhered to in school uniform policies. If it is not, the Department will engage with those schools.

A structure is set out in section 8 of the Act to allow for assessments and so on to be made. Ultimately, however, there is a requirement in section 8 that the Department must issue a direction. A direction is a legally enforceable instruction to the school. Basically, it says, for example, "We see a policy here that does not include trousers. That does not adhere to guideline 3A" — as it now is — "What is your response to that?".

If there is simply a response of "We didn't want to do it", they will be directed to do it. It is not an option.

Ms Sheerin: If we proceed with this and, in six months' time the feedback from schools not adhering to the guidance, as of February, is that they feel that their autonomy is being threatened, is there a risk that the Minister will change his mind again, withdraw the guidelines and go back to his original perspective or position that maintaining the autonomy of the schools is more important than choice for girls? Is that a risk?

Ms McNaughton: I do not see that as a risk. The Minister has been clear that he has heard very clearly that girls want to be able to wear trousers. Some schools have not been allowing that to happen, and he has made it absolutely clear in the guidelines that that option must be provided.

Ms Sheerin: I appreciate that. I am baffled by it. I could hear girls saying that months ago, and I am not even on the Education Committee. I am confused by that.

I have one question on your concerns around the use of leg coverings and the risk, as you see it, of girls choosing to wear jeans or tights. Have there been boys in schools in the North wearing jeans or tights to school?

Ms McNaughton: Not that I am aware of.

Ms Sheerin: So why do you think that there is a risk of girls doing so?

Ms McNaughton: It is about the terminology that we use in legislation. Every single word in legislation has to mean something. I do not know whether there is a definition of "leg coverings" anywhere, but we want to be clear, and I am sure that the Committee wants to be absolutely clear, to schools on what exactly is meant by "leg coverings". Do you mean shorts, skorts, trousers? What is the definition? The risk is there, but I am not suggesting that girls will do that deliberately. Throughout the years, schools have always been a place where some fashions materialise. I can go back to my memories from school. You have to try to be aware of what might come along in the future. A few years ago, there was no such thing as skorts. You do not know what kind of leg covering will appear in a few years' time.

Ms Sheerin: Would you be content for schools to be left with that and to come up with trousers, skorts or whatever they felt appropriate?

Mrs Sweeney: The fact that it is legislation is the challenge. None of this has been in legislation before. These specific types of detail are not in the Act, which is intentional, because, with legislation, there is always a risk of unintended consequences. If you have a term such as "other leg coverings" in primary legislation, where is the power to define that? There would need to be a power to define that, and there is not, as we see it. That means that, if a school has to allow other leg coverings in its uniform policy, how do they stand over how it is interpreted or misinterpreted? It is the unintended risk and the heightened sense or seriousness of the words that are used in legislation.

Mrs Erskine: Thank you for coming to the Committee. I will pick up on Emma's point following the conversation on leg coverings. I do not want to go down the rabbit hole of what constitutes a leg covering and what does not. The Education Committee has been round the doors on that and had lengthy discussions on it. My question centres around the point that Emma was making. Have we picked up on an anomaly in that there is not a definition in place for boys? We do not have a definition for boys or young men who are wearing trousers to school, but we are looking at a definition for women and young girls going to school. Have we picked up on a much wider anomaly that needs to be looked at and legislated for, given that we have been looking at it through the prism of its just being defined for girls?

Mrs Sweeney: The Bill permits:

so that would apply equally to boys or girls in that context. That is one of the reasons why guideline 3A has been added. I believe that it was described on the Floor of the Assembly as the Ronseal approach — it does what it says on the tin. If the policy intention is to enable girls to have the right to wear trousers, they do not have to ask to do so. That is now in the guidelines, so schools must include that in their policy. They must include that all pupils can wear trousers, shorts or other leg coverings.

There is a further challenge: if a term is not specifically defined in legislation, you would normally take its ordinary meaning. The ordinary meaning of trousers is something like this: a fabric that covers legs and has separate coverings for each leg. If the Bill is to proceed, we would say that using the word "trousers" and not having a term such as "other leg coverings", which could be opened up, would allow the inclusion of a much better definition to clarify whether that means tracksuit bottoms or shorts etc.

Mrs Erskine: I am conscious of the time. At the outset, I am trying to understand a school's autonomy to choose what young people wear as part of their school uniform. The DUP's position at the start of this was that schools should have autonomy. That is why, when we take a step further and look at this particular aspect — it goes back to the point that Emma was making — what the Bill is saying is that it gives schools autonomy. Some schools may not mind that a pupil wears a certain leg covering, while other schools will. There is a degree of autonomy. Do you know what I am trying to get at?

Mrs Sweeney: I think that I know what you mean. If I am correct in that, I would have to say that putting the term in primary legislation without a power to define it is the issue. That is sub-delegation, which is wide open to legal challenge. If a school decided to interpret that or, on the face of it, the Department tried to interpret that, there is no power to allow that. This is primary legislation, not guidelines, so it is different. That is where the challenge and the risk around all of that would lie.

Ms McNaughton: What do you define as "other leg coverings"? Do you have a specific definition of that?

The Chairperson (Ms Finnegan): We put that question to the Education Committee last week. It wrote back to define "leg coverings" as covering leggings for sports. The Bill describes leg coverings as being for recreational purposes — for PE. The Education Committee said that "leg coverings" was the best way to describe it without leaving too narrow a definition. I hope that I have that right.

Mrs Sweeney: Our position is that "trousers" provides the flexibility that you are talking about, whereas putting "other leg coverings" in primary legislation —.

The Chairperson (Ms Finnegan): It is recreational, so that means shorts, leggings, trousers, tracksuits.

Mrs Sweeney: With respect, Chair, that is what we have understood to be the policy intention behind it. Guideline 3A is explicit that it is for PE and games, and it covers tracksuit bottoms and leggings; everything is mentioned in there already. That should be much clearer for schools.

The Chairperson (Ms Finnegan): Does the Department intend to table an amendment to clear that up?

Ms McNaughton: I do not know; I really could not say yet.

Mrs Sweeney: The Minister would table any amendments, not the Department.

Ms McNaughton: It is up to the Minister to decide that. Obviously, we will be keen to make sure that the legislation that goes through is appropriate and fits with the School Uniforms (Guidelines and Allowances) Act, but that is a decision for the Minister.

The Chairperson (Ms Finnegan): Are you finished, Deborah?

Mrs Erskine: Yes, thank you.

Mr McMurray: Everything has been covered. I will just pick up on Deborah's point that it is odd that there is an issue with leg coverings when it comes to females all of a sudden, yet we seem to have got through it for generations with males. I get to say that as a fella. I was completely discombobulated by that. You mentioned being comfortable, but there is clearly a whole cohort of young women out there, as there always has been — I referenced my wife — who have not been comfortable.

We received very eloquent evidence about the need to have this in primary legislation. How do you reply to the young women and young men from the Youth Assembly who said that this really needs to be in primary legislation and that the issue really needs to be dealt with? I am sorry for being blunt, but I am very confused. My one reflection on all of this is that every female across the generations to whom I have spoken about the issue asks, "How is this still a thing?". I am sorry for being simplistic about it, but how is it still a thing?

Mrs Sweeney: Our response is that it is done now; it is in the guidelines. That is —.

Mr McMurray: No, but this is about primary legislation. That is the point that I am trying to get at.

Mrs Sweeney: The primary legislation that we have currently is the School Uniforms (Guidelines and Allowances) Act. That has all the powers that are needed. That is now being deployed. It is in the guidelines. There is a duty on schools to adhere to those guidelines. The wording in the primary legislation that we have in operation now is that they "must" adhere. It is now a requirement for all school uniform policies to include the option for girls to wear trousers throughout the school year — there are no seasonal considerations — including for PE and games. It is explicit. We have an enforceability power under section 8 of the Act. We will monitor, and we can enforce. It is not an option. It is no longer a discussion or a request; it is done.

The Chairperson (Ms Finnegan): It could have been done six months ago. That point has already been made. It could have been done with the stroke of a pen six months ago. Last week, we heard that, at the stroke of a pen, it is in statutory guidance. The Youth Assembly clearly and eloquently put across to us that primary legislation is a must to safeguard that.

Mrs Sweeney: It is in the guidelines now. It will be a statutory requirement for schools in their 2027-28 school uniform policy. It is the 2027-28 year because they will be starting to work on those policies now. Also, because the 2026-27 school year has already started, those policies have been published. It would be highly illogical for anyone to unpick them. Schools are under pressure each day. They are educating our children. No Minister is going to try to increase the burden by putting things into, or taking things out of, school uniform guidelines when the message has come through so clearly.

The Chairperson (Ms Finnegan): We could go on forever, but we are pressed for time.

Mrs Cameron: I am completely new to this subject. I was not particularly following it until this point. I am just looking for a wee bit of clarity. We are where we are today. I think that it is fair to say that everybody now wants the same thing. From what you are saying, it is much easier to be prescriptive and descriptive in the guidelines. It is easy to be so, and it is there and it is clear, which is good. We all welcome that. The issue is that, if the sponsoring body — the Education Committee — wants to put it into legislation, the words need to work legislatively. I get the conversation about what we did not have to work out for boys and what we now have to work out for girls, but I presume that there is nothing in legislation that refers to the wearing of trousers by males, which means that it is a completely new thing in legislation. I get that we are in a different place, which means that, if you put it in a Bill, you need clear definitions. Is that right?

Mrs Sweeney: That is correct. We have not had any primary legislation from the Department of Education about trousers for boys' school uniforms.

Mrs Cameron: It is not that we have ever dealt with how you define leg coverings for boys. It has not been done because it has not been in any Bill.

Ms McNaughton: It has never been an issue. It has never been raised.

Mrs Cameron: OK. That is just for my clarity. Thank you.

The Chairperson (Ms Finnegan): Thank you very much for being here to give us the oral briefing and answer our questions.

I propose that a copy of the Department's evidence be sent to the Bill sponsor for comments. I need an indication from the Committee for Education, as the Bill sponsor, on whether we will move ahead with the legislation, the intention being that the right for all pupils to wear trousers be enshrined in primary legislation. Thank you very much.