Executive Meltdown?
Last night's marathon debate on the Executive's Programme for Government ended with a threat from Peter Robinson that if the coalition does not get its act together then there might soon be no government at all.
The Finance Minister said that the negotiations led by the UUP and the SDLP had created a mandatory coalition, and if the coalition members could not agree a Programme for Government and Budget by January the game could be up.
There were several layers of irony in this, given that the DUP ministers left empty chairs in the old Executive, then claimed that their negotiations at St Andrews had superceded the Good Friday Agreement. However Peter Robinson's calculation is that he will be able to stare down the SDLP and the UUP given the contrasting views within those parties about the merits of going into opposition.
On Stormont Live this afternoon the UUP leader Sir Reg Empey and the SDLP Mark Durkan rejected Mr Robinson's comments as "posturing". They both refused to believe that we are heading for meltdown in January.
When the Budget debate got underway, the Health Minister Michael McGimpsey again damned his allocation, claiming that it would not allow him to improve hospital waiting times or introduce measures to cut cancer and heart disease death rates.
Sammy Wilson called on the Minister to resign rather than holding out a "begging bowl" and seeking to "pillage" other ministers' budgets.
Out in the Great Hall, Martin McGuinness turned an old phrase from the Trimble era on its head when he labelled the UUP and the SDLP the "problem parties".
So civil war, then, although the Speaker has hit on a procedural way of defusing matters a little. After poring over the parliamentary rule books, he has decided that he should not have allowed the critical Alliance amendments that caused so much trouble last week and yesterday. This is because the main motions dealing with the Executive's plans for new laws and Programme for Government were "take note" motions, which traditionally are not subject to amendment.
So we will not have the joy of reporting the votes on the two amendments which had been tabled before the Speaker made his ruling. One from the Alliance expressed concern at "the draft Budget's limited ability to address economic change and to redirect resources away from the management of a divided society, to investment in quality public services for the entire community". The other amendment now expunged from history came from the SDLP and the UUP and shared the concerns of Michael McGimpsey and Margaret Ritchie "at the funding allocated for housing and for health, social services and public safety".
I'm 
°ä´Ç³¾³¾±ð²Ô³Ù²õÌýÌý Post your comment
GO FOR IT PETER!
I see the Finance Minister is jumping on the band wagon and taking the lead from his significant other. He is also ‘minded’ to join the ‘Elvis Club’ and threatening – or is he promising – to leave the Building with the entire DUP heal and toe if Sir Reg and Mark don’t accept his Draft Budget proposals by early January 2008? Has he forgotten St Andrews, when the DUP agreed to accept the Sinn Fein demand that the Northern Ireland Act 2000 be repealed? My understanding is that any party pulling out of the Assembly would not affect its status and consequently, Sinn Fein, with a few other minors could carry on without the DUP. Well then Peter, as the billboards say – ‘GO for it’. What a Wally!
The DUP accepted the Mandatory Coalition, along with the St Andrews addendum to the Northern Ireland Act 1998. They should refresh themselves on the legislation…some light reading over the Christmas recess for the ‘Swiss Family Robinson’!
I am quite sure that when comparing the health budget between Northern Ireland and England it has been realised that N.I. is unique in having Health and Social Services clumped together whereas they are separate allocations in England. It would be useful if a direct comparason is published with a suitable footnote to inform the general public.