Debate contribution: Executive Budget
Debate contribution by Miss Deirdre Hargey on .
- MLA
- Miss Deirdre Hargey
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 22 June 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Opposition Business
- Heading
- Executive Budget
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5637973
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Thanks very much. I thank everybody who spoke in this important debate. It is important to point out at the start that the issue before us is not simply the absence of an agreed Budget. At the core of the issue is the absence of an appropriate Budget to fund our public services at the level of need. Those services continue to operate in a system of chronic underfunding, which has been imposed by consecutive British Governments. Indeed, the Fiscal Council's recent sustainability report makes that point very clearly. Whilst it highlights that operating without an agreed Budget is unsustainable, it also confirms that the Executive are not funded at a level that reflects our need, and that is having a profound impact. We know that if a Budget is not agreed over the summer, the permanent secretary in the Department of Finance has the legal power to authorise up to 95% of the 2025-26 spend. That is a legal safeguard that ensures that public services can continue to receive funding for that period. The challenges are taking place against the backdrop of continued underfunding and significant financial pressures. For too long, our public services, workers and communities have been expected to do more with less. We will continue to manage resources responsibly, as the Minister highlighted, but there is a clear need for a fair and sustainable funding model that enables us to invest in the services that people rely on every day. The answer is not the short-term fixes or cash injections that we have had in the past, which have allowed for the repeated Treasury script of record settlements and inability of the Executive to manage their finances — scripts that are often parroted in the Chamber. The crisis stems from a structurally flawed funding framework at the fiscal centre in Westminster. Short-term fixes will not resolve the fundamental issue. What we need is a shift towards long-term needs-based financial packages. For me, of course, constitutional change would be the best overall reform that we could get. We know that fiscal policy at Westminster is being discussed in places such as Scotland and Wales as well, as they look to where their futures are better placed. It is clear that there is a huge disconnect between Whitehall and the reality that is being felt by people on the ground. A British Treasury policy that is managing decay, real-terms cuts and disastrous policy decisions such as Brexit or the funding of wars over public services comes on top of existing disparities between how public services are funded here by the Executive and how they are funded in Wales and Scotland. That disparity causes us to lose out on an additional £1 billion to £3 billion annually. The Fiscal Council's sustainability report backed up the analysis of the Minister and his officials over recent months. The motion makes no mention of that, nor that citizens here and our public services are an afterthought in Westminster fiscal policy. Why should we receive less funding here? Why should our citizens and our public services be treated as second class? That is why Sinn Féin's amendment is so important. It recognises both the scale of the fiscal challenge that faces the Assembly and the reality of continued underinvestment by the British Government. The Opposition say that they are not willing to stand by in this chaos. Why is it that they are willing to stand by in the chaos that is being created at Westminster? Is it because it is their sister party that is creating that chaos? As was said earlier, the public here will no longer be gaslighted. It is not good enough just to accept crumbs off the table. That brings me to the TUV. I am not surprised that the Member tried to use an Oliver Twist analogy. 'Oliver Twist' was about the elite punishing the poor, and that is what we are seeing now with Westminster fiscal policy. I am not surprised that the TUV is looking to the interests of the elite at Whitehall over the interests of people here who are struggling. The Member may be used to saying, "Yes sir, give me more", but we are not. There is no doubt that we need an agreed Budget as soon as possible in order to have certainty and the ability to plan, and particularly to have the three-year Budget that the Minister has been trying to prepare. We also need to be honest that a multi-year Budget, while essential, can only deliver its full potential if it is supported by a fair and sustainable funding settlement. A multi-year Budget would allow for better planning of, greater investment in and the major transformation of our public services, but it cannot be built on the foundations of continued underfunding. I join the Minister in saying that we need to work collectively —.
I urge everyone to support the amendment.
822 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Awaiting analysis
This record has not been analysed yet. It is not counted in any total until it has been assessed.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.