Debate contribution: Commitment to the Proper Use of Public Moneys

Debate contribution by Mr Robbie Butler on 28 January 2025.

MLA

Mr Robbie Butler

Party at the time

Ulster Unionist Party

Date

28 January 2025

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Commitment to the Proper Use of Public Moneys

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4764229

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I rise to speak to this important motion and to recognise and encourage the wider Assembly's ongoing commitment to transparency and accountability. The review of allowances became an essential and critical step in trying to restore public confidence in how taxpayers' money is spent by this institution. Let us be honest: given that we were not here for five years out of eight, we have a job on our hands. Whilst I agree with most of the elements of the motion, as a former and recent Commission member, I must also highlight areas where clarity is needed and where progress has already been made. The motion suggests a lack of audits under the determination and the financial assistance for political parties scheme, otherwise known as "FAPP". That part of the motion is slightly misleading, because a robust audit schedule is in place, with regular reviews that monitor compliance. To claim otherwise would undermine the hard work that is already carried out by the Assembly Commission and the independent auditing teams that provide that service. That said, we should always strive to strengthen those processes when such issues arise, as evidenced by what has transpired and the need for the debate. In that context, I welcome the fact that Mr Gaston has tabled the motion, and I think that some good will come of it. I welcome aspects of the Commission's review and recommendations, particularly those focused on increasing accountability: no one should be afraid of that. Proposals such as keeping detailed records of party political activity by Members' employees, revising job descriptions and requiring declarations of other publicly funded employment are necessary measures and will provide greater oversight and transparency. Those steps are essential in helping to rebuild the public trust that I alluded to and ensuring that allowances are used solely for the purposes for which they are intended. The review's findings, however, raise questions about whether enough has been done to fully investigate potential breaches and ensure that lessons are learned. I urge the Assembly Commission to provide an update on the reports made to the Comptroller and Auditor General and the PSNI under the Commission's fraud prevention and anti-bribery policy. The public have a right to know the outcomes of those investigations, as do Members who play by the rules. Furthermore, the motion highlights discrepancies between media reporting and the conclusions of the review regarding Michael McMonagle's case. That is a particularly serious matter. If the report's findings are accurate, there is arguably an onus on the First Minister to correct the Assembly record, because transparency demands no less. I cannot ignore the irony of Sinn Féin's approach to the early activities in and genesis of the story, which was initially on a safeguarding issue regarding young people. That leads us to this very moment. Advice from Sinn Féin was given to the British Heart Foundation on its responsibility to carry out pre-employment checks, yet similar due diligence appears to be lacking on Sinn Féin's part. Is it a case of, "Do as we say, not as we do"? While progress has been made, the debate reminds us that systems of monitoring and compliance must evolve continuously. Let us learn from the review, strengthen processes and deliver the accountability that the public rightly expect.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:55 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