Debate contribution: Supply Resolution for the Northern Ireland Spring Supplementary Estimates 2024-25

Debate contribution by Mr John O'Dowd on 17 February 2025.

MLA

Mr John O'Dowd

Party at the time

Sinn Féin

Date

17 February 2025

Type

Debate contribution (made as a minister)

Business

Executive Committee Business

Heading

Supply Resolution for the Northern Ireland Spring Supplementary Estimates 2024-25

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4803124

Read the official Assembly record

Text

We can do things better for ourselves. Representatives around the Chamber know their communities better than anyone; they know the challenges and the opportunities that they face. Challenging as the stability of this place may be, having more fiscal powers would make us greater stakeholders in our present and in our future and would mean that we would have to work together to deliver the genuine changes that everyone wants. I favour fiscal devolution. Others in the Chamber may not favour it, but we have to convince them of its benefits. Obviously, I favour constitutional change, because I believe that our ability to make the proper decisions for the people we serve are constrained by the current constitutional arrangements. That discussion and debate will continue as we move forward.

I turn to some of the questions that were raised and some of the points that were made. The proposed regional rate was not "hidden away". It is part of the draft Budget. It is part of the calculations upon which our draft Budget is based. It was set at 5% for domestic properties and 3% for non-domestic properties, in recognition of the current challenges that our business sector faces, though that is not to ignore the challenges that homes, families, communities and workers face. Most people will recognise that you have to raise revenue to deliver public services. Quite understandably, there is a discussion about the scale of that revenue. It is also important to debate how we deliver an effective and efficient public service. A regional rates order will be brought to the Assembly, hopefully by the start of March, subject to the Business Office process. An Assembly debate will be held in the same manner as last year, and it will require a cross-community vote because it is a tax measure. The Executive have agreed the poundage, which has already been announced. Therefore, a decision has been made based on the draft Budget. Indicative multi-year budgets were touched on at the start of the debate. That issue has been raised by a number of Members during the debate. At this stage, everybody should be acutely aware that we cannot set a multi-year budget without Treasury setting a spending review over a corresponding period. Work is ongoing in my Department to assist Departments in looking at their budgets over the next five years etc, but that will only be indicative, and, as we have seen over the past year, things can change quite suddenly, both for the better and for the worse. I am looking forward to the spending review from the Treasury in June with trepidation and with hope. I am hopeful that we will get a three-year resource Budget and a four-year capital Budget, but I am concerned that the spending review might also involve spending cuts. It will bring opportunity, but it may also bring severe challenges to us. I assure Members that, if there is a three-year and four-year Budget as a result of the spending review, I will bring proposals to the Executive for a corresponding Budget based on that review. A number of Members mentioned the financial provisions Bill. It has taken longer than I or, indeed, my predecessor, would have hoped. We are sponsoring the Bill on behalf of a number of Departments that are bringing through different clauses in relation to finances, a number of which relate to the black boxes. A number of Members have referred to the fact that it has taken a while to draft the Bill, but I hope to introduce it to the House in the near future, and then Members can start scrutinising and discussing that Bill. Likewise, the Fiscal Council Bill is important legislation that will put the Fiscal Council on a legislative basis. During Question Time, I touched on how allocations relating to storm Éowyn were delivered, but I will do so again for the fullness of debate. My predecessor wrote to Departments after Westminster made allocations available as a result of its Supplementary Estimates. Departments were asked to return bids as quickly as possible. A number of Departments did that and were successful, as has been outlined in a written ministerial statement to the House, in further discussions at Question Time and in the media. It was a very useful exercise, and I welcome the fact that the Departments were able to respond to that in quite a speedy fashion to allow that money to go straight out to public services as quickly as possible. I will move on to some of the other questions that Members raised. Mr Brett raised the Shared Prosperity Fund. The Government announced in their autumn Budget that they will extend the SPF for one year across each jurisdiction for 2025-26 at a reduced allocation of £900 million. Our allocation is £45 million. As the Member will know, that falls far short of the average £65 million per annum that we would have received from the EU funds that the Shared Prosperity Fund was intended to replace. The 2025-26 transition year is intended to allow work to commence on a longer-term plan to move the funding back under devolved control from April 2026, as outlined in the Labour manifesto. It will also ensure the continued flow of much-needed funding for the community and voluntary sector. While there will be no decision-making role for the Executive in relation to the fund in 2025-26, the Department of Housing, Communities and Local Government at Whitehall will consult Departments here to ensure that what is delivered in the transition year aligns with departmental priorities. Officials will continue to provide technical advice and guidance in order to maximise that funding's impact here. In every monitoring round and Budget exercise, I encourage my Executive colleagues to consider making more use of FTC, and I reiterate that today. Regular and ongoing engagement also takes place between my officials and officials in other Departments on exploring opportunities for making use of FTC, and those conversations will continue. As part of the wider Budget sustainability work, I plan to examine how Departments can make greater use of the available FTC. My officials have already started to look at that, and engagement with the Strategic Investment Board is planned for the coming days. Mr Butler, as Chair of the AERA Committee, said that bovine TB incidence rates here remain high and that an eradication scheme is required in order to tackle the issue. I appreciate that further funding is required, but, as Members will be aware, departmental pressures far outweigh the funding that is available. An additional £4 million was allocated to DAERA in the June monitoring round for tackling bovine TB, and I am open to considering providing additional in-year funding in line with the Executive's other priorities for 2025-26. Members covered a range of issues. Department of Education minor works are a matter solely for the EA and the Department of Education. The level of spend involved did not require my Department to have to scrutinise any of it. Kellie Armstrong asked a number of questions. I may not have a response to them all, but I can assure the Member that we will respond to her in due course. She mentioned welfare mitigations and the spend on them. Mr Gaston also touched on the issue when he spoke about the black box as it relates to the spring Supplementary Estimates. My Department has been working closely with other Departments to ensure that we regularise that spend. That does not mean that it is illegal, illicit or underhand, however. All the spend in black box areas is going to front-line services.

I will in a second. We have to properly manage the spend and ensure that it is fully accounted for and that Committees have all the information that they require about it. I will give way.

I agree with the Member, as I do with all Members who raised the issue. We have to continue to try to bring down the figure. There is a responsibility on individual Departments that have spend within the black box to produce corresponding legislation or to work with my Department to ensure that the provisions in the upcoming financial provisions Bill are improved. A number of Members mentioned capital for social housing and the investment in the number of social homes, which, at the start of the year would have been 400. It is now 1,500, which shows that the Executive are working together and directing funding to where it is most needed. Ms Armstrong raised concerns about the building of social homes being held back by a constraint on the NI Water's spend. There is always the potential for that, but I point Members to an allocation of £19 million that the Executive made in the October monitoring round to NI Water. That released 2,500 homes. Although, in itself, £19 million is a significant amount of money, when we talk about NI Water, we often talk in hundreds of millions of pounds or in billions of pounds. That funding shows that, where there is strategic investment, social housing can be released. I have no doubt that the new Minister for Infrastructure will continue to look for opportunities, such as working alongside NI Water. On the other points that you raised, Kellie, I will ask officials to respond to you directly. I am just checking my list to see whether I have not responded to anyone. There will be individual issues that relate to Members' Department of interest. Whether they are a Chair, a Deputy Chair or a party spokesperson, they have rightly raised their concerns and outlined the opportunities that exist. In fairness, many of their questions relate directly to the relevant Minister or Committee.

I assure Members that I will work with fellow Ministers to ensure that you receive timely financial information and that Committees are allowed to do their work to scrutinise the budgetary process. I assume, however, that Members will agree that it is not a one-off event. Scrutinising departmental budgets does not rely on the spring Supplementary Estimates, the Vote on Account or any period of the entire Budget process: it should be an ongoing role of Committees. I have no doubt that that is the case and that you carry out that work in your Committees. I assure Mr Gaston that we are dealing in billions, rather than trillions — unfortunately. I have not had an opportunity to check the relevant passage in the book. I will have it checked. If there is an error, it will be corrected for the public record. I assure the Member that we are dealing in billions, not trillions. Members will note that there has been a delay in the book's being received. I know that some Members like hard copies of papers. However, we have to question whether it is value for money or sustainable to deliver that document in hard copy to all Members. I will work with the Business Office, the Speaker's Office and others to see whether we can deliver it in an alternative format, because, in my opinion, it is unsustainable to continue to deliver that document in hard copy. Mr Carroll raised a number of points about Invest NI and claims of funding Israeli war planes. I have seen no evidence to support that. The Minister for the Economy has reiterated Invest NI's position on that and, indeed, has asked Invest NI to go back and double-check. As with any claim, unless there is evidence to support that claim, we should be hesitant in making it. I assure Mr Carroll that my Department continues to roll out recruitment to fill job vacancies. We are keen to continue to employ people in the Civil Service. There is no freeze on recruitment. However, we have to be strategic in what posts we fill. I am always conscious that the spending review is around the corner. It may bring good news about multi-year budgets, but it may also bring further challenging news for us, as an Executive. I apologise if I have not covered any Member's individual point. I have tried to cover as broad a range of points as possible. I assure Members who claim that the Executive are not working to a plan that we are working to a plan — we are working to the draft Programme for Government. While I look forward to seeing the final document published, the draft sets out the principles for how we move forward. After the public consultation, there are always opportunities for change to the Programme for Government, but the draft sets out the broad principles of the Executive's direction of travel. I urge Members to pass the various motions that are before them. Since we have come back into the Assembly and the Executive, we have had two priorities: first, to stabilise politics, and, secondly, to stabilise our budgetary processes. I think that we have been generally successful in both. We need to continue to stabilise our budgetary processes. As MLAs, you will all, through your Committees, continue to challenge your Ministers on the performance and work of their Departments and areas of responsibility. As I said at the start of my contribution, yes, we have challenges — undoubtedly, we have challenges — but we also have opportunities. Let us look for the opportunities as well as the challenges.

2,237 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not qualifying

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:01 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 reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification