Debate contribution: Tackling the Financial and Societal Impacts of Division

Debate contribution by Mr John O'Dowd on 25 March 2025.

MLA

Mr John O'Dowd

Party at the time

Sinn Féin

Date

25 March 2025

Type

Debate contribution (made as a minister)

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Tackling the Financial and Societal Impacts of Division

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4866880

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

I welcome the opportunity to participate in today's debate on tackling the financial and societal impacts of division. The 2016 Ulster University Economic Policy Centre study, which Members have been discussing today, suggested a broad range in the possible cost of division of between £403 million and £833 million. The report, however, outlined the significant complexity of the cost of delivering services here: costs that cannot be solely attributed to having a divided society. For example, delivering services in such a small region means that we do not benefit from economies of scale. I add that that is particularly the case when working on an all-island basis. We should be looking for opportunities to build on island-wide service delivery, particularly in border regions, in order to maximise efficiencies and service provision. The Ulster University report also found that the costs of public service provision:

"typically fall within the range of costs identified in other ... regions".

The one exception is the cost of policing. The report also stated:

"It should NOT be concluded from this research that the additional costs identified represent potential savings which could be"

realised by the Executive. It continues:

"In some instances that may be the case, but in other instances the costs are unavoidable or would require significant investment to [overcome]."

We agree that we need to deal with division and its root causes. It is also important to recognise that we have come a long way as a society but there is much more to be done in order to continue to reduce division. As a result, policing and justice costs are particularly high. They are significantly higher than those elsewhere on these islands. The process of reconciliation is key to reducing them. The recently launched Programme for Government sets out an ambitious agenda for change. It will take all Departments working in partnership to address what matters most, including the division in our society. I am all too aware that any means for the Executive to release and divert funding to other areas of pressing need will be welcomed. We have ambition to reduce division. I argue that we need to build relationships not just in the North but across these islands and perhaps in the Chamber as well. We need to manage the change that is coming and work to bring about a more welcoming and inclusive society. Our ambition should be to have a society that is at peace with itself and promotes respect, which would have the added effect of bringing us financial benefits. More critically, in a fast-changing world that is less stable and more uncertain, it is our duty as politicians to provide hope, opportunity and leadership. The Executive Office leads on some of the reconciliation measures. Nonetheless, it is incumbent on all of us to try to heal the divisions in our society and to promote reconciliation, thereby reducing the cost of sustaining division. The Programme for Government outlines the vital need to lay the foundations for longer-term improvements in our society. It sets out three long-term missions — "People", "Planet" and "Prosperity" — which are underpinned by a cross-cutting commitment, "Peace", providing us with a driving ambition for the future and a lens through which to prioritise and ensure that we deliver improved well-being, long-term sustainability and a thriving economy. That is the Executive's cross-departmental plan to tackle the pressing issues to make this a better place in which to live and work and to tackle the big issues facing our society. The reform and transformation of public services is also a Programme for Government priority, with a commitment to establish a new delivery unit at the heart of government. I am pleased to have made significant progress on transformation already by announcing the first tranche of £120 million of funding across healthcare, special educational needs, justice and infrastructure earlier this month. While the total funding available of £235 million will in no way tackle the magnitude of the issues in hand, it will be significant in helping develop and implement a model of delivery to stimulate the wider transformation of public services. Transformation will take time. More needs to be done, and this is a step on the journey. Members are aware that the interim fiscal framework provides new funding arrangements based on a new needs factor of 124%. It is essential that we are funded at least to that level of need in order to enable the Executive to deliver sustainable public services. My Department is working to develop an evidence base to demonstrate the need for a higher level of funding to inform the upcoming spending review in 2026-27. I am pleased that Gerry Holtham, a renowned expert in the field of public finances, has agreed to take forward that work, which is now well under way. I note that the Members who tabled the motion call on me to include an assessment of the cost of division as a statutory duty of the independent Fiscal Council.

It is not my intention, nor would it be appropriate, to undermine the council's independence. Including the specific requirement to assess the cost of division in the statutory remit of Fiscal Council is not the way forward. Indeed, I met the Fiscal Council last week, and the chair, Sir Robert Chote, cautioned against that. Rather, I will seek the Executive's agreement to introduce legislation that broadly aligns with the council's current terms of reference, which are to assess and report on the current and future state of our public services.

The motion calls on the Fiscal Council to be instructed to do a task. That, in itself, is a mistake. The important element of the Fiscal Council is that it is independent. While certain demands or calls on the Fiscal Council may be noteworthy or admirable, it is a mistake for the Assembly or the Executive to interfere in the council's role. We should allow the Fiscal Council to carry out its work and the Executive to implement their Programme for Government and ensure that we all, as political leaders, work together to reduce division in our society and, therefore, the cost of division. I am happy to give way one more time.

I do not criticise the Members for bringing forward the motion. I disagree with them, which is different, about instructing the Fiscal Council to carry out a specific element of work. The Programme for Government, the Executive and the Assembly have roles to play in political leadership, which is the way to reduce the cost of division. We are a great place for putting ourselves down. We have made great progress over the past decade and a half, and I have no doubt that we will continue to do that, but we cannot be complacent about it. I will give way one more time.

The draft legislation is being worked on as we speak, and I hope to have the Bill before the Assembly in the near future and certainly before the end of this period of the Assembly. I am working my way through that, and it is important that the council be put on a statutory footing. Moving on, I also note the suggestion from the Members who put forward the motion for:

"an updated assessment of the cost of division".

Given what I said at the outset about the complexity of attributing cost in the context of a divided society and the broad range of estimates that are in the latest analysis, I do not see the value in updating that highly uncertain assessment. Rather than continuing to reassess the issue, we need to get on with working together to deliver on our Programme for Government commitments, creating positive change for workers, families and communities, which will allow us to create the conditions that will help move our society forward in the years ahead. I thank Members for participating in an interesting, if at times predictable, debate from some. Thank you.

1,336 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:11 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