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

Debate contribution by Mr John O'Dowd on 23 February 2026.

MLA

Mr John O'Dowd

Party at the time

Sinn Féin

Date

23 February 2026

Type

Debate contribution (made as a minister)

Business

Executive Committee Business

Heading

Supply Resolution for the Northern Ireland Spring Supplementary Estimates 2025-26

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5400199

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you. You have caught me unawares: Members were very quick. Thank you, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle,

and thank you to all Members, Committee Chairs and Deputy Chairs who contributed. I listened with interest to the debate, which covered many aspects relating to public expenditure and, perhaps, a few topics not as closely related to the subject that is being considered, although I may be chastised for doing that myself before the end.

I will endeavour to address as many of colleagues' comments as possible. These debates are useful because the spring Supplementary Estimates and Vote on Account are important issues. The leader of the Opposition pointed out, as did a number of other Members, that the subject matter is of grave importance. I will respond to a number of points that the leader of the Opposition raised. Of the moneys that he referred to — £2·1 billion, I think — a substantial amount refers to funding in relation to student loans. There has been a change to that system, which the Chair of the Economy Committee referred to in his comments as well. DFE has adopted a new student loan repayment model similar to that used in England, Scotland and Wales. The old model overestimated how much borrowers would repay, meaning that the loan book was valued too high. The new model shows that the Government will recover less from student loans than was previously thought, which means that the loan book has to be written down, and more Budget cover is needed. Of the remaining amount, £400 million relates to the reserve claim, while the rest of the funding relates to a number of other movements such as Barnett consequentials funding that was carried over. The leader of the Opposition went on to challenge me on where the money is being spent. I have outlined some of the areas. Putting into context student loans etc, it is being spent on front-line public services and making real change in our society. I will give you a few examples. Since the Executive's restoration, the key priority for me has been the fact that there is an additional £1·4 million for public services here, which my predecessor and I managed to secure. There is ongoing engagement, which will intensify in the coming weeks, between the Executive and the Treasury on how this place is funded as, I hope, we move towards the settlement of a three-year Budget. It is unfortunate to hear commentators, and the leader of the Opposition in particular, decrying well-researched and well-founded arguments that this place is underfunded and saying that things are simply all the Executive's fault. When the leader of the Opposition echoes, both privately and publicly to others, what the Northern Ireland Office says on how the funding in this place works, that undermines those of us who are engaging with the Treasury on such matters.

I will in a moment. Apart from Mr Gaston, perhaps, even the truest blue in this place has to accept that public funding is not at the level that is needed in this society to deliver the public services that we rely on. As I said, it does not help our cause if the leader of the Opposition echoes such arguments.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:58 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