Debate contribution: Budget Bill: Second Stage

Debate contribution by Mr John O'Dowd on 24 February 2026.

MLA

Mr John O'Dowd

Party at the time

Sinn Féin

Date

24 February 2026

Type

Debate contribution (made as a minister)

Business

Executive Committee Business

Heading

Budget Bill: Second Stage

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5404601

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Just one second. — our funding, but we can still do things. However, the strategy that is known as shroud-waving does exist and can colour and cloud a debate about setting budgets. My role as Minister, and that of my officials, is to try to get underneath that. There is certainly a role for scrutiny Committees. I am not saying that they do not do it, but the point that I was making about arm's-length bodies and others needs to be driven home. It is not the role of a scrutiny Committee or a member of a scrutiny Committee to come here and simply echo what they have been told. They have a role to interrogate what they have been told.

Let me put it in this context: if DFI had simply accepted that NI Water needed more money and could not progress without significant amounts of money, 5,300 homes would not have been unlocked for future connection. The Infrastructure Minister has said, "I accept that NI Water is underfunded. What can we do to make progress?", and she has brought in the three-pronged approach. That approach is working. The very fact that more homes have been unlocked than were in the Utility Regulator's plan proves that it is working. The Infrastructure Minister will bring her recommendations in relation to developer proposals in due course, and we will see where that brings us. As I understand from the Chair of the Infrastructure Committee, the sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) Bill is in front of the Committee. Those are three tangible programmes of work that are making a real difference. If you get into the mindset of saying, "We have no money, so we cannot do anything", then you will not do anything. I will move on to general comments from other Members. Obviously, Health has huge challenges. Mrs Dodds set out how she believes the Minister should be held to account on that and what can be done. I share her concerns about the capital programme in Health, particularly with regard to the mother-and-baby hospital. It is not justifiable in anybody's mind. However, the challenge that was put to me was what I was going to do about it. I do not have any direct powers to do anything in that regard other than to raise my concerns with the Minister. I know that the Minister has raised his concerns, and there has been protracted engagement with the Belfast Trust both at ministerial level and by the Committee, which has played a huge part in that as well. I will continue to raise my concerns about that. In my opinion, there is a broader aspect here with regard to capital delivery etc. A direct question was put to me about CPD's signing off costs that it knows will have to be changed. CPD and the Department of Health estates should not, will not and do not — I have been informed — submit costs that are known to be out of date. As the Member will know, the costs of capital programmes can change very quickly and rise very dramatically. There is definitely a scrutiny role across that for the Committee, for the broader Executive and for me as Finance Minister. However, I do not have a direct pathway by which to intervene on those matters.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:02 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