Debate contribution: Multi-year Budget

Debate contribution by Mr Matthew O'Toole on .

MLA
Mr Matthew O'Toole
Party at the time
Social Democratic and Labour Party
Date
25 November 2025
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Opposition Business
Heading
Multi-year Budget
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5258685

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I beg to move

Thank you, Principal Deputy Speaker. This is the final Opposition day of 2025. It comes at a crucial moment, because, within the next 24 hours, the UK Chancellor will announce her Budget. The measures announced will have a huge impact on ordinary citizens, but also on the Executive as they plan for what we hope will be — we say, today, that it must be — the first multi-year Budget in a decade and a half to be released before the end of the year. We do not want to talk today about simply the dry process of Budget-setting but about why so little trust and faith are placed in our Executive, and in our politics in general, to deliver for people. The reason for that is the failure to take responsibility for making real changes to people's lives. We know — the Finance Minister and I agree on this — that too much power lies in London and that, all too often, that power is not used for the real benefit of people here. We know that the priorities of successive UK Governments have not been aligned to our needs and those of our citizens. We know that what we have in place now does not work. None of that, however, absolves us from using the power that is at our disposal to make real change or, perhaps more importantly, given the day that's in it, to seek new fiscal powers with which to deliver for our people. That has been the stated policy intent of Sinn Féin Finance Ministers for years: they even spent £0·5 million on a Fiscal Commission to make recommendations, but none of those recommendations has been implemented. We know that there was a discussion in the Executive on 6 November, at least, but the Minister and his colleagues have been pathologically cautious about doing anything at all, because it is easier to blame someone else. Last week, the Finance Minister told the Assembly — after his officials had already told the media — that he hoped to proceed, at some point, with reform of vacant property relief and with some reform of small business rates relief. There was an Opposition proposal on that more than a year ago. We support the Minister's intent, but he offered no detail on when it would happen or even on when the Executive would discuss it. It is well over a year since his predecessor, Caoimhe Archibald, said that she would remove both the cap on domestic rates and the early repayment discount. Again, not only have those things not happened, but they have not even been discussed by the Executive. No finger of blame can be pointed at others, as, under paragraph 24 of the 'Conduct of Executive Business', three Ministers can insist that an item be placed on the Executive agenda. Sinn Féin has four Ministers but, for whatever reason, it has chosen not to use that power. We do not yet know what will be in tomorrow's Budget. We do know, however, that the handling of the UK Budget has been chaotic. This may be the first time that a British Government have U-turned on a Budget before it was actually delivered. We know that much of that chaos has resulted from the fetishisation of arbitrary fiscal rules, with screeching policy adjustments being required to meet those rules and satisfy bond markets. Those may be dry spreadsheet exercises for officials, but they can have devastating consequences when they are translated into policies that affect benefits recipients or low-income families, who have to live with the reality of having their standard of living and quality of life squeezed in order to satisfy forces that are beyond their control. That is the immoral act of austerity that we talk about so much here. All Governments should practise responsible fiscal policy, but it is now widely held that making the less well off shoulder the burden of meeting arbitrary fiscal targets is not simply immoral but economically stupid. The term "austerity" has, shamefully, been turned into a cliché by politicians, particularly, it has to be said, by Sinn Féin Ministers, who have trivialised it by using it as an alibi for a bewildering array of delivery failures. That is especially true of the Minister's former Department: Infrastructure. According to responses to questions for written answer, since February 2024, austerity has been responsible for more than 200 small and medium-sized projects not proceeding. It has been responsible for, among other things, the failure to build a park-and-ride in Comber. That was austerity. There is no Ballykelly bypass. That is austerity. There has been no resurfacing of the Crawfordsburn Road in Bangor. That is austerity, too. The Dial-a-Lift community transport service is not working. That is austerity. Just before I got to my feet, I got an answer by email from the Infrastructure Department telling me that a street in Finaghy, which is in my constituency, is not being resurfaced due to — you guessed it — austerity. Apparently, those things are all victims of austerity rather than ministerial choices and priorities. Even amid such austerity, it has apparently still been possible to find well over £10 million since 2020 to subsidise non-existent long-haul flights via zero air passenger duty (APD); a Sammy Wilson policy that the Sinn Féin Economy Minister still stands over. In the past few days, the Infrastructure Minister has released a social media video, seeking credit for protecting households and workers from water charges. From whom was she protecting them? I am not aware of any party in the Assembly that is actively proposing domestic water charges. The only person who has the legal power to commence water charges is the Infrastructure Minister. Is she protecting households from herself? Of course, she and the Executive more widely are not doing anything on water, as we have seen in today's announcement that the Office for Environmental Protection is launching an investigation into the Minister and her colleague. Just look at what has not happened with fiscal devolution and the changes to the rating system. Look at the plans — the announced or mooted plans — for a developer levy to fund waste water investment. Nothing has happened. It has been mooted by the current Finance Minister, who was formerly the Infrastructure Minister, but there is no detail and no timescales — just sound bites — as our water system holds back the delivery of affordable homes and new jobs. Sinn Féin wants credit for not doing something that only it can do and is not on the agenda anyway. In reality, it is doing nothing. It is happy to let London or the DUP take the blame while this place struggles. Earlier this month, the Sinn Féin leader of the Opposition in Dáil Éireann said that the Irish Government were a "do-nothing Government". I hear you, Mary Lou. Just wait till you hear what is happening up here. You guessed it: nothing. Talk about it taking one to know one. Of course, the DUP is often cited as the reason for blocking fiscal devolution. There is no doubt that it has become deeply sceptical of anything that looks like more revenue-raising or fiscal power. To be honest, however, who knows what the DUP actually wants? It hated the previous Tory Government, who shafted it on the protocol after shafting everyone else here on Brexit. It now hates the Labour Government, too. Presumably, it is waiting on the next British Government so that it can hate them, too. It is not so much a case of 'Waiting for Godot' as it is waiting for Nigel, a leader who is so committed to the unionist cause that he will do you an "up the 'Ra" video for the price of a few pints. Apparently, we are content for those people to make decisions about our future. The case for raising more local revenue and taking more fiscal powers locally has been more than made: it is overwhelming. Apart from the Treasury, the biggest obstacle to doing that is cynicism from a public who have lost all faith in the ability or willingness of local leaders to take responsibility. Madam Principal Deputy Speaker, can you blame them? It does not have to be that way, however. Despite what the Finance Minister sometimes says, as Opposition, we have published a range of proposals. Indeed, many of those proposals have later been embraced by him and his colleagues; they have just not been enacted. From curtailing vacant property relief to ending the early repayment discount, we proposed those measures and we would support them if they ever came to the Floor. We proposed a levy on big agri-food companies to help to fund the recovery of Lough Neagh and nature restoration. We have called for an innovative use of Executive borrowing powers to help pay for water investment. However, Minister, the clue is in the title: you are the Minister, and we are the Opposition. If you want us to do your job for you, we are happy to do it, but you will have to give us proper access to official costings. Minister, what powers do you want, and how do you want to take them? Do you agree with the Fiscal Commission that income tax powers should be devolved, as they are in Scotland? If so, do you think that we should have an intermediate tax rate and a higher personal allowance, as they do there?

How do you propose to fund essential investment in waste water infrastructure? That is not an optional treat. A developer levy? Tell us more. An infrastructure bond? Tell us more. You are responsible for answering those questions.

The first ever republican Finance Minister, Michael Collins, managed to raise a bond worth £20 million in today's money, and he did so while operating in secret. Minister, you have hundreds of civil servants working for you, so the questions that I ask are not unreasonable. They are pressing for two reasons. First, there is virtually unanimous agreement in the Chamber that the UK Government cannot be trusted to prioritise our interests. Secondly and more importantly, you and I represent parties that seek to build a new Ireland, which, at its core, is about building something new on the island. It is about taking the power into our own hands and not simply allowing London to do everything for us. It is about not simply blaming others, not demoralising and disempowering people and not insulting their intelligence with drivel and nonsense. It is about treating the people whom we serve with respect as we give them choices now and in the future. We need to empower our people to build something new in the North now and in the new Ireland that we seek to build in the future. Those are our plans, Minister: tell us yours.

1,824 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: 0.19 (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 (0.86).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (0.74).
  • Subject area: Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty.
  • 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 framing0.14No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.10No
Cultural grievance politics0.02No
Dog-whistle messaging0.37No
Controversy escalation0.16No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.86Yes
Overall judgement0.19At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)0.74
Reports or questions it0.01
Criticises or condemns it0.01
Adopts it0.24
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty0.87
No identity-related subject0.11
Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations0.01
Another identity-related subject0.01
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:48 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