URGENT ACTION REQUIRED - write to Office of First Minister and Deputy First Minister (OFMDFM)

**YOUR LETTER or EMAIL NEEDS TO BE WITH OFMDFM IMMEDIATELY**

WHO?/WHY?/WHAT?/WHERE?/WHEN?

TO WHOM SHOULD I WRITE?

You should write to: Rt. Hon. Peter Robinson MP MLA (First Minister) and Mr Martin McGuinness MP MLA (Deputy First Minister).

You can write to them individually or jointly, in the knowledge that all responses must be signed by both Ministers anyway.

WHY SHOULD I WRITE?

The debate on 15^th March was a hugely encouraging start to the political process. Unilateral cross-party support, with the obvious exception of Sinn Fein, meant the amended motion was passed without division.

Despite this, the Minister for Education maintained her proposed actions do not require decision by the Executive Committee (the 10 Ministers in the Assembly, 7 of whom belong to the parties supportive of the motion on 15^th March & 3 of whom are Sinn Fein).

There are 3 criteria under which the decisions must be made at Executive level. These are matters deemed to be any of the following:

· Contentious (having a significant impact on a sector of society &/or attracting media attention)

· Novel (not so applicable in this scenario)

· Cross-cutting (impacting on the responsibilities of at least two other Ministers)

WHAT SHOULD I WRITE?

Whilst we anticipate full support from the First Minister, writing to OFMDFM is a means of demonstrating to the Deputy, in particular, your personal objections to the proposal & showing how your objections relate directly to the above 3 criteria.

Your letter should make specific reference to these criteria as relating to your personal circumstances & views.

A template is provided to help you piece together some of the main arguments you may feel relate to you. Please expand on them to reflect your personal circumstances & convictions. There is also a sample letter written by Alan Shields linked to below.

TO WHERE SHOULD I WRITE?

Rt Hon Peter Robinson MP MLA

Mr Martin McGuinness MP MLA

Office of the First and Deputy First Minister

Parliament Buildings

Belfast

BT4 3XX

Email Addresses-

ps.ministers@ofmdfmni.gov.uk

or

Peter.Robinson@niassembly.gov.uk

or

Martin.McGuinness@niassembly.gov.uk

WHEN SHOULD I WRITE?

RIGHT NOW Even if you did not sent your letter to OFMDFM by our recommended deadline of the 24th March which has now passed, PLEASE SEND A QUCK to-the-point-EMAIL NOW! It will take you only a couple of minutes to do this. The email addresses are just above.

Copy and paste this if you like...

Dear First Minister Peter Robinson & Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness,

Further to the relevant motion passed on 15th March 2010, I am writing to request that the entire matter of the proposed withdrawal of preparatory school funding be placed on the Agenda before the Executive.

Yours sincerely

*******************************************************************

Easter Recess at Stormont commences on the 27th March, but a pile of letters can be sitting on the First Minister's desk and in his mailbox for his return on 11th April.

Here are some longer templates

LETTER TEMPLATE 1

(Kindly donated by Liz Breadon)

YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS

Rt. Hon. Peter Robinson MP MLA

First Minister

Office of the First and Deputy First Minister

Parliament Buildings

Belfast BT4 3XX

AND

Mr Martin McGuinness MP MLA

Deputy First Minister

Office of the First and Deputy First Minister

Parliament Buildings

Belfast BT4 3XX

20th March 2010

Dear Mr Robinson/Mr McGuinness

Re Department of Education For Northern Ireland (‘DENI’) (published 7 January 2010) proposal to withdraw funding from the Preparatory Departments of Grammar Schools

I write to you to request that you ensure the proposal to withdraw funding from Preparatory Departments of Grammar Schools be brought before the Executive Committee. I detail below the main reasons, under The Ministerial Code, showing why I believe you should be pursuing this course of action:

The proposal is both contentious & cross-cutting under Paragraph 2.4 of the Ministerial Code, in terms of Finance & Equality, & specifically due to the following: (select any of these as appropriate)

The proposal impacts on more than one Minister, namely the Minister for Finance and Personnel & the First and Deputy First Ministers regarding Human Rights and Equality issues.

• The Minister for Education’s proposals impact exclusively on children & parents from the Protestant &/or non-denominational sectors. She is, in effect, withdrawing an area of education which is inherently cross-community, thereby forcing our children into segregated schooling. The DEIA has already stated that this decision is likely to have a disproportionate effect on non-Catholic children (DEIA, page 17)

• Daily media coverage (both national & local) prior to, & in particular, after the debate of the 15^th March strongly suggests that; contrary to the Minister for Education’s comments on that day, the matter is & continues to be newsworthy, attracting regular, critical comment.

• MLA & public support is significant, resulting in a cross-party acceptance of the amended motion on 15^th March, with the obvious exception of Sinn Fein. Jonathan Bell MLA felt so strongly that the Minister for Education was misleading the House, that he became one of the 3 MLA’s ever to be dismissed from the House. Likewise the public gallery felt so strongly about the motion that they were verbally reprimanded by the Chair for their spontaneous applause in support of Mervyn Storey’s comments, an action which also made the front page of the News Letter the following day.

• It has been made very clear throughout all the guidelines produced in relation to education facilities in Northern Ireland, that the parent’s choice is the most important factor. Article 2 of the First Protocol of the European Convention of Human Rights states that ‘the State shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education & teaching is in conformity with their own religious & philosophical convictions’. The Minister for Education has based her proposed policy on the view that funding provision in Preparatory Departments can only be accessed by children whose parents can pay the requisite fees & that this is not consistent with the principle of equity in the distribution of resources. However, the DEIA admits that the Education & Libraries (NI) Order 1986 places upon DENI a responsibility ‘to have regard to that principle that, so far as it is compatible with provision of efficient instruction & training & the avoidance of unreasonable public expenditure, pupils shall be educated in accordance with the wishes of their parents.’ The DEIA states that parents choose the type of education for their children & Preparatory Department education is the preferred choice of education for our children.

• DENI promotes & funds integrated & Irish language schools at an 100% level & to the disadvantage of other sectors. I request you compare this with the current 30% level of Preparatory Department funding & it is clear to see that the threat to withdraw Preparatory Department partial funding is blatantly discriminatory.

• What provisions will be put in place should parents be unable to continue to pay increased fees & they are unable to gain a place in a local primary school considerate of their choice & rights under Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1988?

• My husband & I have exercised our fundamental right to choose a non-denominational primary school, other than an integrated school. We are concerned that our & our children’s human rights are being infringed.

• Regent House School & its Preparatory Department are Controlled schools, coming under the auspices of the SEELB. If DENI withdraws funding the ramifications on the viability & continuation of the Preparatory Department have not been considered & may include staff redundancies. SEELB have recently gone on record confirming this assertion.

• As far as I can see, the Minister for Education has only one argument to support her proposals, that of equality of access, in that Preparatory Departments can only be accessed by children whose parents can pay the requisite fees & that this is not consistent with the principle of equity in the distribution of resources. All individuals have the right to choose how they spend their disposable, net/taxed income &, if Preparatory Department parents choose to forego other lifestyle choices to spend their money on their childrens’ education, then that is their individual choice, prerogative & right to do so.

• DENI are currently paying for 2,426 Preparatory School pupils at an average unit cost of £840 or c.£2m per annum in total. Under the new proposals, they would be paying 2,426 pupils at a unit cost of £2,100 = £5m. This excludes the undoubted substantial redundancy payments to unemployed Preparatory Department staff. Despite this, the DEIA states that there is no potential impact on the DENI budget & the Minister for Education has stated this proposal did not have a financial motivation, but rather solely an equality one.

I thank you for reading this letter & trust you will concur that this contentious &, cross-cutting proposal must be decided upon by the Executive Committee. I request that you consider my request to advance this matter to that level at the earliest possible opportunity.

Yours sincerely,

LETTER TEMPLATE 2

Please click here for sample letter,

(kindly donated by Alan Shields)

Anyone should feel free to use this as a basis for their own letters and preferably tailor them to suit their own views, issues, etc. Remember personalising your own letter/email is best.

LETTER TEMPLATE 3

(kindly donated by Nicola Hunter)

Dear First Minister Peter Robinson & Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness,

Further to the relevant motion passed on 15th March 2010, I am writing to request that the entire matter of the proposed withdrawal of preparatory school funding be placed on the Agenda before the Executive.

I do not feel that the Education minister has treated my child(ren) fairly, in that she has failed to respect their individual rights and consult with them on their views/ opinions of their school. The Education Minister has failed to try to identify "a change management process" in a constructive manner to minimise any detrimental impact to my child(ren). Instead she proposes the withdrawal of funds that could potentially have the impact that the "controlled" preps may need to close. This would obviously cause my child(ren)'s safe and happy schooling environment to be disrupted.

Your sincerely