Debate contribution: Supply Resolution for the Northern Ireland Main Estimates 2024-25; and Supply Resolution for Excess Votes for 2016-17, 2018-19, 2020-21, 2021-22

Debate contribution by Mr Eóin Tennyson on 1 July 2024.

MLA

Mr Eóin Tennyson

Party at the time

Alliance Party

Date

1 July 2024

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Executive Committee Business

Heading

Supply Resolution for the Northern Ireland Main Estimates 2024-25; and Supply Resolution for Excess Votes for 2016-17, 2018-19, 2020-21, 2021-22

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4499019

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I rise on behalf of the Alliance Party to support the Supply resolutions for the Main Estimates and Statement of Excesses. The Estimates, based on the departmental spending plans set out in the Executive's Budget for 2024-25, lay bare the enormous challenges facing every Executive Department. By this stage, the context is well rehearsed: 14 years of Conservative chaos at Westminster has damaged our economy and starved public services of vital investment. However, the decade of stop-start government in this place has also robbed us of key opportunities to stabilise and transform our finances. Indeed, the timing of the return of the Executive has placed us in an invidious position where we have not been able to consult fully on the Budget before the Main Estimates. What is required is not just a change of Government at Westminster but an equally significant change of attitude in the Assembly, with a focus on reforming our institutions so that never again can they be held to ransom by a single party. As I said when we debated the Budget, it is not about whether we believe that the sums of money before us are sufficient — we all know that they are not; it is about whether we believe that this represents a fair attempt at allocating what are so obviously insufficient resources. Irrespective of our views on the Budget, it is vital that the Estimates and the Budget Bill proceed at pace to ensure that Departments continue to have legal authority to draw down cash, otherwise they will be constrained by spending limits put in place by the previous Vote on Account. Of course, the Estimates simply present an opening picture and will be updated as additional funding becomes available through future monitoring rounds. Indeed, I am pleased that the June monitoring was agreed this morning by the Executive, allocating essential additional funding for health, housing, Lough Neagh and our education workers. However, I am bemused that June monitoring has occurred only now, on 1 July, particularly when we know that the Finance Minister wrote to the First Minister and deputy First Minister on 30 May requesting a meeting. That such significant funding was held up by either inertia or dysfunction in the Executive Office raises questions about its effectiveness and scrutiny. At one stage, it looked as though the Education Minister was forced to kite-fly his June monitoring bids in order to force his colleagues' hands to convene a meeting. That is not good enough, but I am glad that the situation now appears to have been rectified. The Main Estimates highlight that over £28 million in spending for vital projects, including welfare mitigation, the Fiscal Council and tackling violence against women and girls, continues to rest on the sole authority of the Budget Act. The use of the so-called black box has ballooned far beyond the intended £1·5 million limit in the absence of an Assembly in five of the last seven years. In the interests of good governance, it is imperative that more appropriate statutory powers are legislated for by the Executive over the coming months and years.

I agree entirely with the Member.

I turn to points that were raised in the debate and in response to the Minister's statement. Mr Aiken claimed that the Ulster Unionist Party's position was vindicated, and I want to challenge that. It had been suggested that we delay the Budget and, as a consequence, the Main Estimates to ensure that June monitoring could be included at this stage. Not only was that approach prohibited by the Northern Ireland Act 1998 and, therefore, not possible, it would have carried significant risk for no practical benefit. That has been borne out today, because we have been able to allocate additional funding to the Department of Health without following the wisdom previously expressed by Mr Aiken. His approach would have carried the significant risks of prolonged uncertainty, starker and deeper cuts later in the financial year, overspend and Treasury recalling the £559 million in debt forgiveness. All the while, as we know from our experience today, the amounts in June monitoring could be allocated anyway and provided for in the Supplementary Estimates. I am grateful that the Ulster Unionist Party is not in charge of our purse strings at this juncture. The DUP asserted during the debate that all other parties welcomed the financial package. Whilst all other parties welcomed the progress that was made on the financial package, we were all clear that it did not solve all the issues or provide sustainable finances for Northern Ireland in the long term. Indeed, if the DUP wishes to take a cursory glance at Hansard or at my media appearances, it will see that that has been our position. I also remind Members that it was the DUP's boycott of the Assembly. The rest of us said consistently that there was no good reason for the Assembly and the Executive to be collapsed. The DUP made clear that it was boycotting the Assembly not over finances but over academic arguments about Brexit. It has much to answer for in regard to the position that it took and the damage that it caused to our public services. None of us on these Benches will take lectures from the DUP about the damage to our finances.

I will indeed.

I will address those comments before returning to the substance of the debate. You can smell the burning rubber all over the Assembly from the U-turns that the DUP has conducted since 2016. Unlike the DUP, the Alliance Party has been consistent. We warned the DUP that there was no such thing as a good or sensible Brexit and that it would be hoist by its own petard. We warned the DUP not to trust Boris Johnson, because it would be thrown under the bus —

— whatever was written on the side of it.

I will return to the debate, but, in fairness, the Member raised the point, and, with respect, Mr Speaker, he was not challenged on its substance.

I will return to the substance of the debate, Mr Speaker, because I think that I have answered the Member's points adequately. There is no doubt that the challenges facing our finances are huge. We have, however, made significant progress in obtaining concessions from Treasury that our funding formula was not fit for purpose. The interim fiscal framework is a gateway to obtaining a properly baselined fiscal floor that reflects our relative need and the fiscal levers that we require to deliver sustainable finances. If, however, we are to be taken seriously as a negotiating partner, we must continue to show leadership and engage in responsible, mature government, even when the choices are difficult. That is why the Alliance Party supports the resolutions, and we urge other Members to do so.

1,144 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:55 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