Debate contribution: Public Finances
Debate contribution by Mr Eóin Tennyson on .
- MLA
- Mr Eóin Tennyson
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 6 February 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Public Finances
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4255966
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Thank you, Mr Speaker. First, I congratulate you and your team of deputies on your appointment. I also wish the First Minister, the deputy First Minister and each of their Executive colleagues well as they embark on this new endeavour. I am hugely grateful to the people of Upper Bann, who have placed their trust in me. It is a huge honour to represent them in the Assembly as the first Alliance MLA for that constituency. I pay tribute to Dolores Kelly of the SDLP, my predecessor, who served the constituency with distinction for many years. There have been a number of historic firsts this week. It would perhaps be remiss of me not to mention at the outset the historic moment on Saturday when my party colleague Andrew Muir MLA was installed as the first openly gay Minister. On a personal note, I am immensely proud of my colleague, whose appointment represents a landmark moment for equality and takes us one step closer to having an Executive that fully represent the diversity of the society that we are all here to serve. Rightly, there is an expectation outside the House that we move on quickly from the symbolism and start to deliver for the people whom we represent. There is no doubt, as others have said, that the challenges are immense. The cost of living weighs heavily on households and businesses, with too many struggling to make ends meet. Nurses, teachers, classroom assistants and so many other public servants have been forced on to picket lines in pursuit of fair pay. Our health service is in need of radical transformation and reform. Parents are being crippled by the cost of childcare. Delivering on the ambitions that we all share in the Chamber and tackling those challenges will require a step change in our approach to public finances, both from the UK Government and, I argue, from those of us in the Chamber. On that basis, my party is content to support the motion and the amendment. Over the past 13 years, successive Tory Governments have given us more than a decade of austerity, a botched Brexit and a disastrous mini budget. They have prioritised tax cuts over public spending and ignored the impact of the so-called Barnett squeeze. The constraints that flow from that are having an impact right across the UK but are perhaps most acute here in Northern Ireland, as attested to by the Fiscal Council, because we are the only devolved Administration that are currently funded below the independently assessed level of relative need.
It is welcome that that is now a matter of public record and that, in recent negotiations, the UK Government conceded that fact. It is inconceivable, therefore, that the Government will continue to wilfully underfund Northern Ireland on that basis, yet that is exactly what the Government propose to do.
The adjustment to our funding formula diagnoses the problem but ultimately fails to remedy it. Instead of being applied to baseline Barnett, as is the case in the Welsh model, the formula operates not as a fiscal floor but as a fiscal ceiling, with funding per head slowly gliding towards a point below which we should never have been allowed to fall in the first place. The deal that the Government have put forward is imperfect. It is not a guarantee of long-term financial sustainability. However, it provides space and time to engage with Treasury on a more sustainable financial framework when the £3·3 billion runs out in two years' time. Crucially, with the Executive restored, we now have a stronger collective position from which to negotiate rather than separate and disparate political voices. To inform that negotiation, Alliance proposes the establishment of an independent commission to set out recommendations pertaining to our funding formula and fiscal framework, drawing on the experience of the Holtham commission in Wales, to ensure that our funding model is built on evidence rather than political horse-trading. We must also be honest that it is simply not possible to have sustainable public finances without sustainable political institutions. Stop-go government has impeded our ability to deliver good governance and has undermined the Executive's ability to transform public services and make the necessary changes to tackle the cost of division. It is therefore regrettable that, given the opportunity on Saturday by the Opposition and again here today by Mr Butler, to commit not to collapse the institutions for the remainder of the mandate, neither the First Minister nor the deputy First Minister was able to make that commitment. It again underlines the need for reform of the system to ensure that the institutions can never again be collapsed so that we protect our people, our public services and our public finances. Undoubtedly, huge challenges and difficult decisions lie ahead, both for the Assembly and the Executive. At this juncture, I give my commitment that I want to work constructively with all the Executive Ministers as they navigate those challenges. I would much rather that those decisions be taken by locally accountable and elected local Ministers than be in the hands of the Secretary of State and the Conservative Government, so I wish those Ministers well as they proceed.
869 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.05 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.89).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.99).
- Subject area: Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues.
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.06 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.08 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.89 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.05 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.99 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.01 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.96 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.03 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:35 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.