Debate contribution: Standing Order 42(5): Suspension

Debate contribution by Mr Matthew O'Toole on 19 February 2024.

MLA

Mr Matthew O'Toole

Party at the time

Social Democratic and Labour Party

Date

19 February 2024

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Executive Committee Business

Heading

Standing Order 42(5): Suspension

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4222966

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I am afraid that I must agree in part with Jim Allister, which is something that I do not always do, but it is important to acknowledge that we are being placed in a deeply unacceptable position. There is, of course, the irony that some of the people now talking most loudly about us not having scrutiny were the loudest cheerleaders for us not having an Assembly to scrutinise anything for more than two years, but let us stop, pause and reflect on the purpose of what we are doing. Authorising money to be spent is the most important thing, in many ways, that the legislature can do. We are supposed to have a Budget process that involves the Minister of Finance bringing a Budget statement, which is a strategic spending document, having agreed it with her or his Executive colleagues, to the Assembly before the end of the financial year. At the same time, we are supposed to have spring Supplementary Estimates so that we can vote to regularise the spending for the end of the current financial year. That is part of what we are doing now, but, as has been said correctly, we do not have any spring Supplementary Estimates, so we are not able to properly judge and read across what we are voting on.

Of course, we have not had a Budget, even a one-year Budget, since, I believe, 2021. The process is completely suboptimal. In fairness to the officials involved, there are clearly extenuating circumstances, which were created by a combination of the political chaos that we had here for several years and decisions made by the British Government to not regularise spending authorisations and not pass a Budget Bill at Westminster.

Arguments have and will be made about what will happen if we do not proceed with suspending Standing Orders, and I will say something about accelerated passage in my role as Chair of the Finance Committee, but it is important to say that we cannot simply go on for ever and a day rushing through spending legislation in this place. We are not just granting accelerated passage, which is pretty commonplace for Budget Bills, but we are suspending Standing Orders. Although we will not push this suspension of Standing Orders to a Division, we do not support it. It is not only suboptimal; it is completely unacceptable. We need a properly transformed way of doing Budget scrutiny in this place, and the Executive and, indeed, the Department need to stop treating this place with a degree of, at best, patronisation and, at worst, mild contempt in how we do scrutiny. We need to do our jobs properly and, critically, from the public's perspective, be seen to do that. Therefore, it is important to lay down a marker with this suspension of Standing Orders. For those of you who are new to the Chamber, this is going much further than we normally go in ramming through a Budget Bill.

496 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:37 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.

Challenge this classification