Debate contribution: Comptroller and Auditor General: Salary

Debate contribution by Mr Daniel McCrossan on 2 March 2026.

MLA

Mr Daniel McCrossan

Party at the time

Social Democratic and Labour Party

Date

2 March 2026

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Committee Business

Heading

Comptroller and Auditor General: Salary

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5432620

Read the official Assembly record

Text

The motion is interesting and raises issues that go far beyond the simple question of salary or administrative arrangements. We are dealing with the independence of one of the most important scrutiny roles in Northern Ireland: the Comptroller and Auditor General. The C&AG plays a vital and effective role in protecting the public interest. Through the work of the Audit Office, the C&AG uncovers waste, inefficiency and failure in public services, identifies where public money is not delivering and highlights the outcomes that people deserve. That work is real and effective, and it matters. It went on when the Assembly did not function; in fact, in the absence of these structures functioning, the only governance that existed in this place came from the Audit Office. Without the C&AG, the Assembly would have far less ability to scrutinise government and hold Departments to account. I am Chair of the Public Accounts Committee, so I see at first hand the vital work that the C&AG and the Northern Ireland Audit Office carry out. The evidence gathered by the Audit Office raises a number of questions. Its independence is absolutely fundamental. This is a key question: should politicians set the salary of the Comptroller and Auditor General in Northern Ireland? Surely that raises a question about the independence of the role and about political interference in and influence over the role of the watchdog in Northern Ireland. There are serious concerns about the direction being taken by the Audit Committee. As a previous Audit Committee Chair, I had the honour of adopting a clear and principled position that linked the Comptroller and Auditor General's remuneration to the judicial group 5 rate. That was a cross-party agreement. I do not know why the Executive parties are deviating from the decision that was previously reached. A lot of evidence was brought before the Committee at that time that established that that was the right direction of travel. That approach was deliberate. It provided a transparent benchmark, removed political discretion and protected the independence of that fundamental and vital office. It ensured that politicians were not placed in the position of deciding the pay of the very individual responsible for scrutinising how public money is spent. That was the right approach then, and the same approach should be taken now. This question must be asked: why has the Audit Committee deviated from that position? What is the rationale for abandoning a system that provided clarity, independence and objectivity? No convincing explanation has been offered; instead, we are presented with a proposal to set a cash figure until further notice, without reference to any recognised benchmark and without any clear mechanism for future adjustment, which is the very opposite of what the independent body is doing on MLAs' pay. That is not good governance, it is not transparent and it is not acceptable. Let us be honest about what the proposal means. Under the proposal, in effect, politicians will determine the salary of the C&AG, the office responsible for scrutinising those politicians and the Departments that they oversee. That creates a clear and unavoidable conflict. It is not healthy for the Assembly, for scrutiny or for public confidence. The previous Audit Committee, which I chaired, linked the C&AG's salary to the judicial group 5 rate precisely in order to remove any perception of political interference. Perception matters: independence must not only exist; it must be seen to exist. I am particularly concerned that the change is being driven by Executive parties that sit on the Audit Committee — the same parties that hold ministerial office and control the Departments that the C&AG holds to account and are time and again the core feature of the Audit Office's reports. It is deeply troubling that the Executive parties appear willing to abandon a system designed to protect independence in favour of one that increases political control. That sends entirely the wrong message. It is extremely dangerous territory for the Assembly to encroach on. The Comptroller and Auditor General must be free to follow evidence wherever it leads, free to expose waste, free to challenge Departments and free to speak truth to power without fear, favour or political influence. The role exists to hold government to account. It is not the role of government to exert influence over that office, yet the Audit Committee's actions do exactly that. Why deviate from the previous position? It was well set out in the Assembly, during the previous mandate, why the Committee reached that position. I believe that you do a disservice to that office, to the C&AG, who is a fantastic leader in that area, and to the Assembly. The Audit Committee is making a huge mistake, and we will not support it.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:57 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