Debate contribution: Supply Resolution for the Northern Ireland Main Estimates 2025-26

Debate contribution by Mr John O'Dowd on 3 June 2025.

MLA

Mr John O'Dowd

Party at the time

Sinn Féin

Date

3 June 2025

Type

Debate contribution (made as a minister)

Business

Executive Committee Business

Heading

Supply Resolution for the Northern Ireland Main Estimates 2025-26

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4986107

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I await a lectern, Mr Speaker. I am sure that one is heading in this direction. Supply resolution debates can often cover many aspects of public expenditure, not always directly relating to the subject being considered. I will, however, endeavour to address as many of the points raised during the debate as I can in the time allotted. First, I once again thank the Finance Committee for its agreement to take this important legislation through by accelerated passage. That agreement secures the timely passage of the legislation through the Assembly, thereby avoiding any risk of uncertainty over the funding of public services. Having listened to colleagues' comments, I will respond to a few of the points made. There was a common theme in some of them. I once again thank the Chairperson and the Committee for agreeing to accelerated passage. As leader of the Opposition, Mr O'Toole once again raised his concerns about the quantity of time that he has to respond in such debates. I suggest to him that perhaps quality, over quantity, might be more beneficial to us all. That is a common theme through all of these debates, and it may be a theme to go with. Mr O'Toole rightly pointed to concerns raised in the Chamber yesterday. I have not fully studied the statement from the Minister for Communities, but there was concern that we may not meet our social housing targets for this year. However, we are in June of the financial year, and there is a long slog ahead. I am committed to working with every Minister around the Executive table to deliver, in particular, on the Programme for Government targets. The figures set out by the Communities Minister state that he will build around 1,000 homes this year: we want to see that figure increase, but we also welcome the fact that there will be 1,000 homes built for families and people to move in to this year. Of course, there is rightly a focus on the homes that will not be built. I commit to working with the Communities Minister and others, but let us also look at what will be done: 1,000 homes will be built. I understand that the Communities Minister will bring a paper to the Executive for discussion, and I look forward to it. There are ways of looking at how we deliver on our commitments in a constrained budgetary period and at those with whom we partner to deliver those projects. For instance, are the reserves of housing associations and their access to loans being fully utilised to deliver our building programme? Are there other ways of doing that? It is important to look at that. I have been engaging directly with the Treasury on Housing Executive borrowing. I do not believe that that will be resolved as part of the comprehensive spending review, but it has to be resolved as part of the fiscal framework. The Housing Executive being allowed to borrow is a game changer for many reasons. It is something that we need to continue to look at.

The Treasury is not yet convinced of our arguments. Perhaps I will put it that way, as it is the most diplomatic way of putting it at this stage, as negotiations continue. Philip McGuigan, Chair of the Health Committee, pointed out the pressures facing the Health Department in the delivery of front-line health services. We all agree that there are huge challenges there, as in other Departments. I noted a comment from him which I concur with:

"our Committee has, on too many occasions, discussed problems in the Belfast Trust".

As an interested observer and as Finance Minister, I can only agree with that comment. There is deepening and growing concern about the continued presence of the Belfast Trust in the media for all the wrong reasons, particularly, from a Finance point of view, the significant overruns in capital projects in which the Belfast Trust has been involved. We rightly point towards Westminster and Whitehall for the lack in the overall, global Budget, but whatever moneys we have must be used effectively and efficiently, and we have to deliver changes in people's lives. No doubt, the Committee will continue its work. The Health Minister has put particular focus on the matter, but, as Finance Minister, I also have significant interest in it. Nick Mathison, Chair of the Education Committee, referred, as others have done, to the pressures on Departments' budgets — inescapables and other pressures that may be there. Figures vary, whether you are talking about £300 million for Education, £600 million for Health or maybe £200 million for Agriculture. All those figures are there and in the public debate and discussion. I encourage Committees to interrogate thoroughly the figures that are presented to them by Departments in relation to the pressures that they are under, what is inescapable and what their priorities are, moving forward. It is vital that not only Committees but the general public fully understand the true scale of the challenge that faces the Executive and the Assembly moving forward in the delivery of public services. Figures being bandied about may garner headlines. As I have said in the Chamber before, I will not be guided by the latest headline when making funding decisions. However, I want to ensure that Committees have had the opportunity to understand fully what is a real pressure, what is inescapable and what is a negotiating position. When we understand that fully, it is much easier to understand the scale of the challenge. When you understand the scale of the challenge, it is easier to find a solution, where possible, to that challenge. Mr Mathison also talked about transformation and funding for special educational needs. There has been a significant additional allocation of around £15 million to SEN in the last Budget round. I am particularly interested in that area and want to continue to support it. However, again, as each Minister comes to me setting out their challenges, I will do what I have asked the Committees to do — I have no doubt that Committees are doing it — which is to drill down into the figures that they present to me. I will put it to them: "What are you doing to help yourself with regard to transformation and ensuring that your budget is being used efficiently and effectively, and what are your plans for change?" Then we will get down to the nitty-gritty of what I, as Finance Minister, can do for them. It is not the role of the Finance Minister to become a counsellor for Ministers or for the chief executives of arm's-length bodies (ALBs) or other agencies. I am not here for people to tell me their problems. I am here for people to tell me the challenges that they face, and I will work with them when we have engaged fully and accepted the scale of the challenge that they face. That may not be resolved in one Budget year. Hopefully, with regard to the multi-year budgets that will be completed after the comprehensive spending review (CSR) on 11 June, Departments will have the opportunity to forward plan much better and we will have the opportunity to make the transformation to our services that, I think we all agree, is needed. Unfortunately, Robbie Butler is not in his place. He mentioned a report from DAERA. I may have misheard him, but I thought that he said with regard to the Committee report that it does not matter what the allocation is if it does not meet the need. If that is his position, I have to disagree: it does matter what the allocation is. No Department receives or will ever receive, I suspect, the full allocation that it has bid for. However, as I said earlier, we expect to see moneys being used effectively and efficiently. A failing that any organisation can have is to become fixated on what you cannot do rather than on what you can do. It is vital that we are much more focused on what we can do, while we continue to lobby and engage with others on the proper funding that we need. Colm Gildernew, Chair of the Communities Committee, touched on social housing, the need for a properly laid-out anti-poverty strategy and other matters. I have no doubt that the Committee will continue to engage with its Minister on those matters. Paul Frew referred to the need for Ministers to come to this place and give people hope. Although I do not agree with some of what Paul had to say, I fully agree with him on that point. I am not talking and have no doubt that Paul is not talking about people coming here and giving false hope, but there is no point in anyone coming into the Chamber and laying out a list of problems. We all know the problems. We want to see people coming in here and presenting solutions. I will continue to engage with Executive colleagues in that mode. Jemma Dolan reminded us of a lot of the ongoing work that has come about as a result of the Budget. The cross-border health scheme that was recently announced by the Health Minister would not have happened without the Budget initiatives taken by the Executive and the Health Minister. The increase in childcare funding would not have happened. The increase in funding to ending violence against women and girls would not have happened. The increase in funding to tackle the pollution of Lough Neagh would not have happened. The increase in funding for community safety would not have happened. The increase in funding for skills in our economy would not have happened. None of that would have happened had it not been for the strategic Budget decisions made by the Executive and endorsed by the Assembly. Deborah Erskine, talking about DFI and the challenges that it faces, covered the wide aspect of the road network and road safety, which is particularly pertinent given the debate in the Chamber yesterday and the Minister's announcement about a change in legislation. On NI Water, as with all bodies, multi-year budgets will assist us in planning. Steve Aiken touched on arm's-length bodies and agencies. I say this to all arm's-length bodies: the cavalry is not coming over the hill to save you. I will touch on the CSR in more detail as I come to the end of my address. We will have to do things differently. The Member has expressed concerns and asked questions about developer contributions. Those things have to be looked at. How the NIEA examines developers' solutions on waste water has to be looked at afresh. When developers come forward with proposals on systems that are guaranteed for a lifetime and those proposals are turned down, that is short-sighted in many ways. There will not be the hundreds of millions of pounds extra that the Utility Regulator drew up — in a budgetary vacuum, it has to be said — for NI Water or for any other organisation. We have to look for alternative ways of delivering the housing, the businesses, the schools, the hospitals and all the things that we need. We simply cannot stay still in that regard. I will move on to another point that Steve Aiken touched on. ALBs spend a huge amount of public funds — a huge amount. Steve rightly asked this: while the Assembly and the Committees hold Ministers and Departments to account, who holds ALBs to account? I would argue that it is the Minister, first and foremost, and then the Committees, if they do not do it in conjunction. Today, my permanent secretary addressed a significant number of ALBs on the projected Budget trajectory for the next number of years, emphasising to them that, to use my terminology, the cavalry is not coming over the hill. We have to live within the budgets that we have and do things differently. We have to be accountable, effective and efficient. I have no doubt that Committees will take on the charge of holding ALBs to account.

A number of Members asked for an update on the CSR. Yesterday, I was in the Treasury engaging with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Darren Jones. The CSR is not yet complete: the discussions around it are not yet complete. We have presented Treasury with the Holtham report and given it the review that was carried out by Ulster University of the cost of doing business here. Obviously, it has the Fiscal Council report, and it has comments from Sir Robert Chote on the necessary outcomes of the CSR. Tomorrow, I will meet the Secretary of State to continue the conversations around the comprehensive spending review and the urgent need for a fair funding settlement to be given to this place in order to allow Departments to carry out their duties and to allow us, as Paul and others have said, to give people "hope" in the time ahead. It is too early to state what the outcome of that will be. There are different noises in some of the media around what actions are likely be taken with Whitehall Departments. Obviously, if there are swingeing cuts in Whitehall, we will have a reduced consequential. My officials will continue to engage with Treasury, and I will continue to engage at a political level until the announcement is made. It is not over until it is over. We await the announcement on 11 June. Obviously, I also raised the need for Casement Park to be properly funded. Phillip Brett made comments as Chair of the Economy Committee. He spoke of the challenges facing the Department for the Economy, as well as the challenges facing the Committee in its scrutiny role. I will not get into the issue of the Department's accounts, because the Public Accounts Committee is scrutinising that. It would not be appropriate for me to comment. He asked what bids have been made as part of the June monitoring round. The closing date for bids from Departments to the June monitoring rounds is 5 June. We await bids from Departments — they have until 5 June. I had announced a number of funding allocations, which we already knew about, as part of the budgetary statement on what will be allocated on 5 June as Barnett consequentials. Those were included in the Government's announcement on National Insurance contributions, and they stand. I am not aware of any further consequentials at this stage, and I am not aware of what movement there has been between Departments in the Executive — obviously, my officials are gathering that information — so I am not aware of how much money there will be to allocate in June. However, I suspect that it will not be on the scale of what we saw last year. We will wait to see what funding comes forward. Finally, Timothy Gaston exposed himself as a —. I wrote on a note that he had exposed himself as a Tory, but then I scribbled it out. Maybe he is closer to Reform UK now. I did not want to insult him by calling him a Tory. His theory that, once the Executive label is attached to something, everything goes wrong — public services go wrong — does not explain why public services in England are in such a dire state. The common denominator is that public services have not been properly funded over the past decade or more. You cannot blame the Executive for it all. The Executive have responsibilities, individual Ministers have responsibilities, and it is right that we have to be held to account over those. He also said that there was still a significant portion of funding not covered by its own legislation. Those areas will be covered once we have brought forward the Fiscal Council Bill and the financial provisions Bill, both of which, in fairness, Mr O'Toole asked about. Both Bills are with my Executive colleagues. I hope to have those passed by the Executive and brought before the Assembly before summer recess. They are with Executive colleagues. The other legislation that will cover the outstanding spend that Mr Gaston referred to is the truth recovery Bill, which, I believe, TEO is progressing. Stand-alone legislation will cover those areas. In conclusion, I find these debates useful in the sense that I get an overview from Members of their opinions and understanding and their evidence-based engagement at Committee level. It is very useful to me as Finance Minister to sit through these debates and listen to the experiences of Members and the information that they have at hand and that they present. We undoubtedly face significant financial challenges, and I have no doubt that we will continue to face them after the comprehensive spending review is announced on 11 June. We cannot, however, simply shy away from the challenges that we face. Let us instead understand their scale, which will allow us to bring forward proposals to tackle them. We will have to do things differently in several different areas. Agencies and regulators that operate on behalf of the Assembly, the Executive and the public will have to be imaginative about how we can put in place the infrastructure to support the economy, housebuilding and people. We will have to ensure that our arm's-length bodies, in whatever form, use limited public resources as effectively and efficiently as possible. If they do not, they will be held to account. I commend the Supply resolution to the House.

2,937 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:46 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