Irish Political News

Having spent most of last year filming, I think it would be fair to say that Will Crawley is eagerly anticipating the launch of BBC NI’s natural history series “Blueprint”. - there’s a trailer here.

This major, multi-faceted season across television, radio and online features a series of exciting output which will give the people of Northern Ireland an unforgettable insight into where we live and who we are and change the way they see Northern Ireland forever.  Blueprint series editor Paul McGuigan says: “We’re rolling 600 million years of Northern Ireland’s unique past into an exciting series across television, radio and online.”

Now, if someone could remind Northern Ireland’s Culture Minister..

We’ll have to wait for the actual detail, but for now the most obvious difference between George Bain’s recommendations and the Northern Ireland Education minister’s announcement would be the specification of local areas.  Whilst Bain recommended - the report was published in December 2006

16. Local areas should comprise coherent sets of nursery, primary and post-primary schools, and, as appropriate, special schools, as well as accessible further education provision, and as far as possible lie within a single local council’s boundaries.

The minister reportedly proposes

A central group and five area groups are being set up to bring forward proposals on the future of education after the end of the 11-plus this year.

Where that leaves the other elements of the Education system, such as the Education and Skills Authority, is not clear. Adds According to this report - “The Educational Skills Authority, which will be established in 2009, will be tasked to deliver restructuring at all levels of the school system from pre-school to post primary. The work of the six bodies in the interim will identity the structural change required.” Update Official statement here

As Bain also recommended

13. Until the Education and Skills Authority has acquired the capacity to exercise its estate planning function, the Department of Education should act quickly and decisively to take forward area-based planning as soon as possible in the year 2007, with the full support of the relevant education authorities.

14. The Department of Education should establish a provisional timetable, to be refined and taken forward by the Education and Skills Authority, specifying target dates for the following key steps in setting up and implementing the area-based planning strategy: (a) the Department of Education’s strategic framework of vision, policy, principles, and guidelines; (b) the specification of local areas; (c) the review of local provision; (d) the initiation and conclusion of local planning; (e) the submission of area proposals to the Education and Skills Authority; (f) the finalised and approved area plans; and (g) the implementation of individual plans for the estate as a whole.

15. Future school building projects should be approved only after area-based planning is established, and previously announced capital projects that are currently underway should be reviewed, according to their stage of development, for their consistency with the area-based approach. [added emphasis]

Also of interest is the reported proposed provisional timetable, which Bain also recommended.

She hopes that a new system can begin to be established in April 2009.

However, full area-based plans covering pre-school, primary and post-primary on the model outlined are not expected to be in place until 2010 at the earliest.

As Mick noted previously

Consider Ed Balls proposed legislation to provide education for all up 18. However controversial the legislation, the timelines are clear. No change for 17 years olds until 2013, and none for 18 year olds until 2015.

Today's Irish News published details of how highly sensitive information on school pupils and their families was found lying about in Camlough, Co. Armagh. The revelation was made by SDLP Newry and Armagh MLA Dominic Bradley, who had been passed the information.

The highly sensitive material contained information on 120 people who were pupils quite a few years ago and included details about threadbare clothing on unwashed children and derogatory descriptions of parents. The files included details of of doctors' examinations, information on admissions to a psychiatric institution and prosecutions for non-attendance at school.

One parent was described as a 'n'er do well'. Nice.

However, rather than accept Mr Bradley's right as a democratically elected politician- nay, a citizen- to publicise this massive faux pas, Sinn Féin Education Minister Caitríona Ruane described his decision to highlight it as "politically motivated".

What exactly is wrong with him putting this in the public domain? This is an extremely serious issue and I think the public has a right to know. Is Ruane suggesting that Mr Bradley should have kept this quiet? That's not exactly the hallmark of open government. Methinks she's just slightly unhappy at the authorities being embarrassed by a security breach of the highest order. Apart from that, it's both irrelevant and none of her business what Dominic Bradley's motivation was- the fact is that he highlighted a serious mistake by the authorities, and that's all that matters. I really can't see what political gain he stands to acquire as a result of this.

However, to be fair to Ruane, she did add: "I accept that there is a problem."

Understatement of the year.

Dominic Bradley insisted that he had acted in the public interest and told the Ruane not to shoot the messenger. The Assembly was informed by the Education Minister that a full investigation had begun, with Ruane adding that she wanted: "...to say to the adults who were children then we are going to be contacting them and we will totally protect their confidentiality and their identity." I'm sure they'll be reassured by that...

News that Amnesty International (NI) are seeking an accomodation with NI Catholic bishops in order to be allowed to organise in schools within the Catholic Maintained sector would appear to call into question whether the organisation is still interested in campaigning for “internationally recognized human rights for all..” What it says about Amnesty NI’s campaign for a ‘Bill of Rights’ in Northern Ireland is anyone’s guess.  From the RTÉ report.

Patrick Corrigan, Director of Amnesty International in Northern Ireland, said he would be happy if the Catholic bishops were to signal to their schools that they could re-join on the basis that they would not support abortion.

But a Church source said the bishops also needed reassurances that money collected in the schools would not be spent on supporting abortion.

Mr Corrigan responded that it may be possible to develop its model of collecting money for trusts in order to provide that reassurance. But he said further talks are needed to explore that possibility.

Despite the efforts of Members in our Legislative Assembly termination of a pregnancy is legally available here in some circumstances - they’re just arguing about the guidelines for those circumstances.

The Northern Ireland Education minister, Sinn Féin’s Caitríona Ruane, wasn’t in the studio on Stormont Live today, and after Sunday’s Politics Show that was probably a wise move, but she was, via an OB link, understandably keen to talk about the education budget announced today.. but the ongoing discussion on post-primary education hasn’t gone away.  Her response to Jim Fitzpatrick’s question on whether there was budgetary provision for any reforms in that sector is notable for its focus on the transfer of pupils.. and the absence of any mention of costs associated with area based planning. Responding to the Finance minister’s comments in the Assembly yesterday, the Education minister, whilst declining to discuss “confidential Executive business”, accuses Peter Robinson of “playing politics with education” and declares that she “will not be bullied by Peter Robinson or any other minister”.  Mark Devenport makes some sharp points at the end of the clip on consensus through an Executive sub-Committee.. and notes that, regardless of how the discussions Mick mentioned might develop, any proposals will have to go to the Assembly eventually. [Thanks, as always, to Typhoo]

The Belfast Telegraph picks up one element of the comments in the Assembly by Northern Ireland Finance minister, the DUP’s Peter Robinson - namely Executive support on any “agreed approach” to the future for the post-primary education system - while the Newsletter picks up another. But his actual comments, on Sinn Féin MLA John O’Dowd’s intervention on Hearts and Minds, are worth quoting.

I am pretty sure that the Member [John O’Dowd] was simply using a wooden spoon to stir the argument on television and was not seriously committing himself, his Minister or his party to that approach. I am sure that he does not want to play hardball on an issue that is vital to the future of so many people in Northern Ireland. I state again that the education issue can be resolved only by agreement, and the processes for obtaining agreement exist. That matter must be dealt with urgently.

Those comments in full

I noted with interest the comments of the Member for Upper Bann John O’Dowd on ‘Hearts and Minds’ last week. I do not know whether he was speaking tongue-in-cheek or whether he was being mischievous when he said:

“St Andrews did protect academic selection; it did not state that the Department had to fund academic selection. So if a school wishes to bring in academic selection, that is up to the school. What we are saying is,”

—I am not sure to whom the “we” refers —

“the Department should not be funding this system”.

Although I am sure that it was a small part of his intention to stir up debate on the programme, I am equally sure that the Minister of Education could not possibly be thinking along the same lines, because both the Member and the Minister will know the circumstances of any Department’s spending. If there was a suggestion that any Department in Northern Ireland was discriminating against children, as in that case, or against any others, I would be forced to remove its delegation to spend money. Under the legislation, approval from DFP is required. As a matter of good working practice, a delegation is given to each Department to allow it to spend money. If there was an issue about how money was being spent or not spent, my Department would have to go back to it.

I am pretty sure that the Member was simply using a wooden spoon to stir the argument on television and was not seriously committing himself, his Minister or his party to that approach. I am sure that he does not want to play hardball on an issue that is vital to the future of so many people in Northern Ireland. I state again that the education issue can be resolved only by agreement, and the processes for obtaining agreement exist. That matter must be dealt with urgently.

The Member for North Antrim Mr Declan O’Loan raised the issue of how we might fill the additional requirement if we were to adopt a new policy that had a significant cost attached to it. One of the key decisions that the Executive must take in examining any proposal from any Department is whether they can fund the policy; if there is insufficient money to fund a policy, it cannot go forward in that shape and form. That is why Executive approval and agreement are required on all such issues.

As a representative of an interested party, Frank Bunting of teachers’ union INTO says that the two consultation documents, on selection and area based planning, in the ongoing discussion on post-primary education are “eagerly awaited”.  Apart from his comments on the need for consensus, the points on other issues are, for now, more rumour than fact, but he suggests that approximately 30 local area based planning groups are to be proposed - that number could be aligned, as recommended by the Bain Report, to current local Council areas with possible additional groups for Belfast.  The BBC’s Mark Devenport also notes that “the minister is supposed to be bringing a paper on education to the Executive on Thursday..” Anyway, here is Frank Bunting in discussion on the BBC’s Stormont Live where he predicts a “real deadline” of Easter-time this year. [N.B. he’s not an MLA, despite the BBC caption - Ed]

The Hearts and Minds discussion on post-primary education wasn’t as confrontational as the Assembly Committee meeting with the minister last week, but then the minister wasn’t there.  Neither was the Sinn Féin spokesman on Education, Paul Butler.  Interestingly instead of the other SF member on the Education Committee, Michelle O’Neill, the party’s chosen designated hitter for the programme was John O’Dowd, Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee - and he conceded that individual schools would be able to set their own academic selection exam, a year after that was made clear. Also on the panel were the DUP’s Mervyn Storey and the SDLP’s Dominic Bradley.  It’s worth noting, in particular, that during the discussion area based planning was highlighted as “the lynch-pin” of any proposals for the future.

The newly-hatted Cardinal Sean Brady appears on today’s Irish News front page warning the Northern Ireland Education minister, Sinn Féin’s Caitríona Ruane, to clarify her vision for the post 11-plus system or risk chaos. [subs req] Adds It’s not the first call for more clarity from that sector

“It is vital that the minister ensures that there is root-and-branch cohesion across all these initiatives.  Thus, it is one thing to announce that the end of the 11-plus and a transfer at 11 based on parental election,” he said.  “But before that can have any meaning there need to be systems in place to promote an area planning process - and that will not be possible without a clear sustainable schools policy.”

The Cardinal went on to say

“However this exemplary post-primary review process will not be able to continue unless the department gives coherent policy coverage,” Cardinal Brady said.

“If we get clear directions and support from DE [Department of Education] and from the minister, we have the potential to develop a wonderful, robust system of sustainable schools into the future.”

“Without that clear guidance and appropriate sequencing of initiatives we risk removing the old and replacing it with chaos.”

And, in addition to the ministerial response yesterday, there are a few interesting paragraphs in the subsequent press statement, on an attendance at a teachers’ union’s conference, from the Education minister today

“There has been much interest, in particular, about transfer at age 14. Whilst there is consensus that age 14 is a key decision point, my plans have been interpreted as meaning wholesale structural change requiring huge capital investment.

“For those who believe this to be the case, let me say that I do not believe in a one size fits all approach to post-primary provision. I believe in the benefits of designing local solutions to address local circumstances and that is why I will shortly be bringing forward the detail on an area-based planning approach. This will enable local communities to decide on the structures that will be most appropriate for their areas.

“There has also been interest in how children will transfer at age 11. For those unclear about how this procedure will operate, I would like to emphasise that children will transfer on much the same basis as they currently do. Admissions will be determined on family, community and geographic criteria, without the need for academic attainment criteria.”

Paragraph one doesn’t actually deny “wholesale structural change requiring huge capital investment” would be the result of the proposals - despite the previous references to their cost-neutralness - although paragraph 2 does point to “local communities” making that decision and, presumably, taking responsibility for it.

And in paragraph 3, “without the need for” doesn’t rule out the possibility of academic attainment criteria.

But here’s a reminder of what the Bain report had to say on area based planning

Planning: A Strategic Approach

11. The Education and Skills Authority should plan the schools’ estate on a local area basis, within a strategic framework of vision, policy, principles, and guidelines provided by the Department of Education.

12. Within the strategic framework established by the Department of Education, the Education and Skills Authority should have overall operational responsibility for the strategic planning of the schools’ estate.

13. Until the Education and Skills Authority has acquired the capacity to exercise its estate planning function, the Department of Education should act quickly and decisively to take forward area-based planning as soon as possible in the year 2007, with the full support of the relevant education authorities.

14. The Department of Education should establish a provisional timetable, to be refined and taken forward by the Education and Skills Authority, specifying target dates for the following key steps in setting up and implementing the area-based planning strategy: (a) the Department of Education’s strategic framework of vision, policy, principles, and guidelines; (b) the specification of local areas; (c) the review of local provision; (d) the initiation and conclusion of local planning; (e) the submission of area proposals to the Education and Skills Authority; (f) the finalised and approved area plans; and (g) the implementation of individual plans for the estate as a whole. [added emphasis]

15. Future school building projects should be approved only after area-based planning is established, and previously announced capital projects that are currently underway should be reviewed, according to their stage of development, for their consistency with the area-based approach.

16. Local areas should comprise coherent sets of nursery, primary and post-primary schools, and, as appropriate, special schools, as well as accessible further education provision, and as far as possible lie within a single local council’s boundaries.

17. Planning should ensure that proposals for contiguous local areas are considered together, and that their interrelationships are identified and taken into account, before investment decisions are made.

18. Area-based plans should ensure that each area is served by sustainable schools that provide high quality education for all pupils and that, taken together, balance the expressed wishes of parents and the projected requirements of each school sector, with the cost-effective use of capital and recurrent funding.

It’s also worth noting that we are still waiting for the “foundation for a radical new future for Northern Ireland’s education system..”

A Department of Education spokesperson has reminded parents of their obligations in relation to providing “documents verifying particularly the residential information” in applications for post-primary school places.  That’s a requirement brought about by a recent judicial review.  No mention of EU laws though.. From the Department of Education’s statement

“Parents are also advised to read carefully the Department’s “Dear Applicant” guidance which is located near the beginning of the Education and Library Board Admissions Criteria Booklets. This explains the need for all applicants to provide alongside their application forms, documents verifying particularly the residential information contained on their application forms. The precise details of these requests will be contained in the individual entries of post-primary schools contained within that booklet. Responsibility to ensure all verification documents are attached to the Transfer Form (in the case of applications to post-primary school) rests solely with the applicant and they should ensure that all documents are attached before signing off the Transfer Form. The provision of false or incorrect information or the failure to provide verifying documents according to the required deadline may result in either the withdrawal of a place or the inability of a school to offer a place. [added emphasis]

This year’s 11-plus results may be arriving in the post today.. but the row about ‘What’s happening in the Education system?’ rumbles on.  Following that Education Committee meeting on Thursday, when the Education Minister, Sinn Féin’s Caitríona Ruane, finally handed over answers to the Committee’s questions, the minister complained that - “To date, the education committee have failed to give me any written information on my proposals”. The Committee meanwhile have written to the Assembly Speaker, the DUP’s Willie Hay, complaining about the minister’s behaviour - both Sinn Féin members of the Committee recorded their opposition to the complaint.. natch..  But, with the Alliance Party’s Trevor Lunn, MLA, suggesting “It would’ve been better to have [that meeting] in private”, I’m in agreement with Committee Chair Sammy Wilson - “Let’s not hide the minister from this. The minister should have shown transparency from the start.” And let’s not hide the Committee either..  On the answers the minister handed to the Committee ahead of Thursday’s meeting, there’s a telling piece of information from the UUP’s Basil McCrea in the report

And during yesterday’s meeting, the UUP’s Basil McCrea questioned the minister’s conduct in relation to the body. “This committee is adjunct. There is no point in us meeting, almost,” he said. Referring to the document that members received minutes before the meeting - but which had been given to the media 24 hours earlier - he said: “If you’re given it five minutes in advance it does show a lot of attitude.”

Ken Reid’s UTV News report below contains some scenes from the confrontation at the Assembly’s Education Committee meeting, as commented on by Mick here, but beyond that confrontation there is a declaration from the Education minister, Sinn Féin’s Caitriona Ruane, that she will not be proposing the ‘Craigavon model’ because it includes academic selection at 14.  The Minister also declares that her proposals do not include any selection at any age.  Which may be noteworthy for the Finance minister.. and not just for any suggested cost-neutralness. The Belfast Telegraph’s Education Correspondent, Kathryn Torney, gives an eye-witness report. And in related news, the Belfast Telegraph also reports that the UUP’s Basil McCrea has said that if the Minister does not disclose information on her confidential meetings about plans to replace the 11-plus with a system of transfer at the age of 14, or does not agree to meet the Committee in private session, then he “will press for a vote of no confidence to be taken by the Assembly and would hope to obtain the committee’s support for this.”

It’s also worth noting that the confrontation was almost guaranteed by build-up to the meeting, as described by Committee Chair, the DUP’s Sammy Wilson.

After her statement to the Assembly on December 11 2007 there was even greater confusion on the issue.

The committee posed 30 questions to her for clarification but no answers came.

We requested a meeting and eventually, through the intervention of the two Sinn Fein members of the committee, were granted a one hour meeting.

All members had hoped for a constructive engagement instead we got a farce which left everyone apart from the Sinn Fein members fuming.

The members were given a paper at the start of the meeting with her responses to the questions posed to her, leaving them no time to study it.

Those question, set by the Committee for the minister to answer, had initially been responded to with a “not possible” from the minister.

Meanwhile, as reported here..

A spokesman for the Minister said: “As the Minister has made clear - the last Transfer Test will take place in 2008. That is irreversible.

“In terms of the full range of the proposals for the future of post-primary education outlined, there will be a legislative basis for these proposals as appropriate (the Minister stated her intention, for instance, to bring forward admissions criteria regulations).

“This legislative basis will, of course, be established by proper consultative and legislative procedures.”

He added: “The minister believes she can build a consensus of support for her proposals and we are working to achieve that.”

Further to Pete’s post yesterday, it is worth noting Sammy Wilson’s (DUP Chair of the Education Committee) scathing remarks on the Minister’s performance yesterday:

The Minister was only willing to meet with the Committee for an hour, and she spent almost half of that time reading a pre prepared statement. She also read it in Irish, obviously trying to draw it out as long as possible so that she wouldn?t have to face the committee and answer the questions that they had.

As we’ve noted on Slugger before, Ms Ruane has landed the toughest and most complex brief of all her party colleagues. Possibly even of the whole Executive. But Slugger understands that relations within the department are strained. Apparently senior civil servants were not informed of the content of her one major announcement of her tenure in office so far: the timetable for the abolition of the 11+ examination and the raising of the transfer age to 14.

The removal of the Ministerial office from departmental headquarters in Bangor by her predecessor Martin McGuinness certainly hasn’t helped matters. Slugger understands that one recent request to speak to her private secretary ended up being routed to her constituency office. Such organisational malfunctions can only add to an already difficult job.

At the heel of the hunt, Ms Ruane’s often brittle response to criticism from political opponents cannot obscure the fact that, so far, she is simply not delivering the goods.

The Assembly website notification of today’s meeting of the Education Committee warns that “Please note these timings are indicative”.  However the Education minister, Sinn Féin’s Caitríona Ruane, took the 10.00am-11.00am scheduling literally and, when the alloted hour was up, abruptly left the meeting announcing that she had “another engagement to attend” - that hour included an opening statement by the minister which lasted more than 20mins.  The Committee members might have wanted to ask more questions about some of those contentious proposals.. or, indeed, those “cost-neutral” ones, but the minister had left the building..  As the BBC report states

In December, Ms Ruane was criticised for a lack of detail in how the new transfer process would operate, but she said at the time her statement was merely an “early briefing”.

The minister promised to bring more detailed proposals to the assembly in the new year, but education correspondent Maggie Taggart said “there was little light shed on the future for post-primary pupils” during Thursday’s meeting.

And as Mark Devenport notes in his blog

Safe to say, after this somewhat confrontational performance, relations between the Minister and the Committee cannot be said to have improved.

Adds Additional quotes here

Far be it for me to get in the middle of an argument between supernaturalists.. But, with continuing calls for Wallace Thompson to “be sacked” by DUP minister Nigel Dodds, there is an interesting intervention in the Irish Times today from Brian Kennaway [subs req] on the row following the comments by Thompson on Joe Duffy’s RTÉ radio show - when he referred to Pope Benedict XVI as the Antichrist. Adds Mick has some additonal links and coments here.

While Duffy’s professionalism shone through and Thompson expressed his personal views, which he is entitled to hold, it was the reaction from listeners which proved the most enlightening. 

Many failed to understand what their own churches actually believed, others clearly had no understanding of Christian faith, while some, including Thompson, misrepresented what other churches believed. Thompson, whose published letter to the editor of The Irish Times sparked the debate, told his radio audience, in reference to the pope being called the antichrist, “that is the position of the Church of Ireland and all the main [ Protestant] denominations”. 

This is not true.  Neither the Church of Ireland nor the Methodist Church has any such reference in their doctrinal standards. The Presbyterian Church in Ireland, has subordinate standards, the Westminster Confession of Faith, which states (at Chapter 25, paragraph 6): “There is no other head of the church but the Lord Jesus Christ: nor can the pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the church against Christ, and all that is called God.”

And he provides some fascinating historical references in an attempt to create a better understanding of the language and history.

The historical use of this term antichrist is worth noting. The first use of the term outside its use in the Bible (John’s letters) and in reference to the pope, was not by fundamentalist Protestants but by the popes themselves. This was a term in common use by Catholic writers long before the Protestant Reformation.

For example Pope Gregory I (590-604) stated: “Moreover, I say confidently that anyone calling himself universal bishop, or desires to be so called, shows himself, by this self-exaltation, to be the forerunner of the antichrist because by this display of pride he sets himself superior to others.” This was the same Gregory who, apparently, refused the title pope given to him in 604 by the Roman emperor Phocas. This was of course before the time of the primacy of the Bishop of Rome, over the whole church.

Later in 991, Arnulf, Bishop of Orleans, mourned the state of the church declaring: “Reverend Fathers, who do you regard this man to be who sits on such a lofty throne? For there is no doubt that if he is destitute of charity, and if he is proud by virtue of his own intellect, then he is the antichrist sitting in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.”

Eberhard, Bishop of Salzburg in 1242 made reference to Pope Gregory IX as: “That morally depraved man whom they are accustomed to call the antichrist, upon whose forehead is written the name of contempt. . . .” It was, therefore, natural that the writers of the Westminster Confession of 1643-1647 followed the language of their Roman theological predecessors. They did not intend any offence by the use of this term Antichrist. Nor did they regard it, in the words of the Dean of St Patrick’s, as “unhelpful name-calling”.

Those who adhere to reformed theology today and use this term, I am sure, equally intend no offence. Though I can understand how many Catholics find it offensive, when they are unaware of the general use of the term within their own church in the past. The term antichrista did not have its origins among the fundamentalist Protestants of the “black North”, or even the so-called heretics of the Protestant Reformation. Blame the popes - they started it.

Indeed.

... I don't know what the fuck is going on in the Six County Department of Education, but I would like to disassociate myself from it completely.

Sin é.