Debate contribution: Budget (No. 2) Bill: Final Stage

Debate contribution by Dr Steve Aiken OBE on .

MLA
Dr Steve Aiken OBE
Party at the time
Ulster Unionist Party
Date
23 September 2024
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Executive Committee Business
Heading
Budget (No. 2) Bill: Final Stage
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4543687

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Consistent with the Ulster Unionist Party's approach so far, we will vote against the Final Stage of the Bill. As a party, we have consistently pointed out that the Budget provisions are insufficient to cover the critical requirements of our health service. It is only nine months since the all-party talks that many of us sat through and at which all parties agreed that Health was the priority, but the subsequent provisions have not only gone against that priority but, when they were originally presented, made a real-terms cut to health resources. While we welcome the additional funding that came in the June/July monitoring round, it is far short of what is required to deal with the critical challenges that we face, and it came before the draft PFG was published. We are aware of the negotiations between Departments and the Finance Minister, but there is no acknowledgement of the level of need or the requirement to prioritise Health and other hard-pressed services such as the PSNI. The Finance Minister wrote to Ministers and informed the Finance Committee that she was proceeding with spending allocations based on discussion with His Majesty's Treasury, acknowledging that it was at risk and based on likely allocations from the Supplementary Estimates following Rachel Reeves's Budget next month. That additional funding is hoped to be in the region of £0·5 billion, at least £250 million of which we reasonably expect to come to Health. As finance spokesperson and through questions put by party representatives, we have repeatedly queried the confidence that the Minister has in assurances from the Treasury. I wish to make it clear that I am in no way — I mean this — calling into question the Minister's belief or her integrity in reporting her exchanges. However, as MLAs, we must all call into question the assurances from the Government. Three weeks ago, I attended the British-Irish Association conference in Oxford and heard the Secretary of State wax lyrical about the benefits of major projects in Northern Ireland powered by the city deals, amongst other things. Alongside the Tánaiste, we heard the famous reset being emphasised. Less than a week later, the city deal was paused. Then, parts of it were reinstated. When the issue was raised by the Finance Minister, she was told to discuss it with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury. I understand that that discussion is yet to happen. That worries our party, as it should worry others. A Budget assuming an additional £0·5 billion on the basis of assurances from a Treasury that will not engage on city deals must, I am afraid, be suspect. Where are we today? First, even with the current Budget allocations, we do not have the resources for what, nine months ago, was our number-one priority: Health. Secondly, even if we get that additional £0·5 billion and it is hypothecated, the challenges will remain.

However, based on the city deals debacle, what real confidence can there be that that additional funding will be received, especially given that the Government are quite happy to remove the winter fuel allowance while their members cloth themselves in freebie suits? I was going to make a joke about glasses, but I am wearing a pair. I paid for mine, by the way.

Thirdly — I say this specifically to other parties in the Executive — the Chief Constable had to write to the Prime Minister because the PSNI has been starved of resources, and he has raised very serious concerns about his ability to maintain public safety. That, coupled with the very real concerns that we have already expressed about maintaining the health of our constituents, must show that we cannot accept the unacceptable.

You can indeed, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I am just coming to the end.

Yes, yes. Rather than writing letters of censure, we should all join together to reject the Budget, which does not and cannot deliver for the people of Northern Ireland.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

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 (0.94).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
  • 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

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.05No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.04No
Cultural grievance politics0.02No
Dog-whistle messaging0.11No
Controversy escalation0.16No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.94Yes
Overall judgement0.05At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)1.00
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
No identity-related subject0.92
Another identity-related subject0.04
Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty0.02
Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations0.01
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups0.01

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:03 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