Matthew O'Toole
South Belfast · Social Democratic and Labour Party · Northern Ireland
“I appreciate my colleague's giving way. Unfortunately, I was not here for all of the Minister's remarks — like her, I have been in the Chamber for a lot of today, so I had to pop out and attend to some other business. I presume that the Member will agree that these provisions could be more properly included in the Sentencing Bill.”
“Clearly, however, the regulatory and enforcement regime for all those watercourses and marine environments is way out of date ecologically and, indeed, economically.”
“We learned about the antics of Jeffrey Donaldson that were not criminal — so far — only after his conviction. Reporters have been able to go and find that information and people have been able to speak — felt able to speak — because Mr Donaldson has been sent to prison, convicted of appalling crimes, and is therefore less likely to seek r…”
“We are pleased, in broad terms, to support it at Second Stage. We welcome the move towards an approach to fisheries management that is ecosystem-based rather than narrowly species-based.”
“We were robust in opposing those who were not willing to deal with the nutrients action plan, for example, which should have been a core part of dealing with Lough Neagh. Of course, the farming industry needed to be engaged, and the Minister has been doing a lot of that work recently.”
“On a point of order, Mr Speaker. In just a few hours' time, the House will go into recess for more than two months. There are two outstanding and grave matters that the public in Northern Ireland want us to deal with, but we are walking away, so I want your advice on Standing Orders.”
The complete record
Every one of 5,909 lines we hold for Matthew O'Toole, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 48 of 119.
“That is in the context of there being cattle on the island that graze in both County Fermanagh and County Cavan. That is a fact. We have farms that straddle the border. It is not that they are next to the border; they are on the border. There are cattle, sheep and other livestock that graze and are farmed in both jurisdictions. There is milk being served in the canteen downstairs that will have been milked on one side of the border and processed on the other side of the border. There is not and has never been any practical way of disaggregating our food production and our agriculture sector on the island — never, ever. The DUP and its fellow travellers never offered us any practical solution for that.”
“My colleague Patsy McGlone has ably put on record the issues with this, frankly, absurd prayer of annulment, but I will make a couple of additional points. <BR /> <BR />We have here a situation where, I am afraid, the in-denial meet the incompetent. The DUP has tabled a prayer of annulment on, effectively, the continuation of core animal health rules that affect farms and food producers in Northern Ireland. Let us rewind the tape a little to the years between 2016 and 2020, if those of us present can bear it, when the people who did not want Northern Ireland to align to plant and animal health standards were repeatedly asked what their alternative was and how they could make our agri-food sector work when the two bits of Ireland — the two jurisdictions on the island — followed different sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) standards.”
“I appreciate the Chairman's giving way. I speak as someone who is not on the Committee. To clarify for the House, is he saying that there has been some kind of legal lacuna since 2021? I am not entirely clear about that from Miss McIlveen's remarks, but it would be helpful if the Chair were to explain to us what precisely the legal issue has been for the past three years.”
“On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Further to my Member's statement, in my role as leader of the Opposition, I have a particular concern around Ministers' failure to bring oral statements to the House. The Finance Minister is in the Chamber now, but we have now had two monitoring rounds and a draft Budget that should have been delivered to the Assembly orally but were delivered by written ministerial statement. Last week, we had a significant announcement from the Health Minister. Can you advise whether you are satisfied with the situation or whether your office is doing further work to encourage Ministers to bring oral statements to the Assembly?”
“However, the rest of the official Opposition and I are serious about it. We intend to keep holding people to account, whether they like it or not.”
“Before Santa got here, the Finance Minister announced the draft Budget, which, by the way, included a policy decision to increase rates for the people of Northern Ireland. That had already been decided. It was not brought to the Chamber. I see Members across the Chamber smiling at me as I make that point, but our job is accountability. Whether you are in the Opposition or the Executive, simply waving stuff through, pretending that we are not here to hold people to account and are simply here to act like pygmies and have meaningless debates and motions, reading things out and not scrutinising the people in power fails the people who sent us here. <BR /> <BR />I am serious about accountability. I am aware that it prompts guffaws and occasionally contempt from people in the Chamber who do not like accountability.”
“<BR /> <BR />A particularly egregious example or set of examples, is that of the Finance Minister — now successive Finance Ministers — having meaningful decisions — when I say "meaningful", I am talking about large and important decisions — on spending announced by written ministerial statement on Wednesdays, Thursdays and Fridays and not bringing them to the Chamber. Tens of millions of pounds were allocated in response to storm Éowyn through the January monitoring round, but that was not brought to the Chamber. That was issued by written statement with no one — not a single MLA from the Opposition or Executive parties — being able to ask a question. <BR /> <BR />Not only that, but the draft Budget was announced before Christmas.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is just over a year since we returned to the Northern Ireland Assembly and Executive, but we face, in this place, a crisis in accountability, a crisis in the public's trust that people here — specifically Ministers — will make decisions, be willing to take responsibility and answer for those decisions and be held accountable for them. I will give a couple of examples. Last week, the Health Minister announced a new policy on core grant funding for health bodies. That resulted in a loss of funding for a wide number of organisations, although I accept that it also meant that some bodies got core grant funding for the first time. You would think that that was the kind of thing that a Minister should bring to the Assembly to face questions on. He did not do that, but he is not the only one. There are umpteen examples.”
“I am tempted to respond to some of what Dr Aiken has said — he has said it repeatedly in the Chamber — but I will not, because I have other things to talk about. <BR /> <BR />First of all, I associate myself with your remarks about Andy Allen, Mr Speaker. We should all be proud of Andy's achievements. I also mark, if I may, the anniversary, which, I think, was last week, of the passing of our constituency colleague and your predecessor in the constituency, Christopher Stalford, who is sorely missed from the Chamber. As somebody who had very different political views from Christopher Stalford, I often think of him when we have debates here. I think of his intelligence and wit. I just wanted to pause and remember him.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I am not entirely sure why I am being called to speak. I gave the Finance Committee's view in the previous debate, which was that the Committee gave its agreement. I am content to proceed. I have given the Finance Committee's view, which is on the record from the previous debate.”
“I appreciate the Minister's offering some insight into that matter. Will he give us a timeline for when he expects to be able to provide clarity? Does he have a meeting coming up with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, or is he talking just about ongoing correspondence between his officials and Treasury officials? When can we expect to know more?”
“I am not saying that those are the right or wrong targets, but they are clear targets to which the Minister and the Government can be held accountable. Would it help you to build political support if the Programme for Government had that level of detail?”
“Minister, I acknowledge and have sympathy with some of the arguments that you have made about other Executive parties' hypocrisy, but would it not be easier to get political support and buy-in and, indeed, public engagement on your budgetary needs if the Programme for Government were more specific about the actions that you intend to take? Compare it with the Southern Programme for Government. I do not endorse it or say that it is deliverable, but it states:”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Since she raised it, may I ask her a question out of curiosity? Has her Committee been scrutinising the Budget and the related lack of a plan for the Maze/Long Kesh Development Corporation? I was wondering whether she has heard anything more about that during the process.”
“Therefore, while it is welcome that spending continues to be authorised — in the same way in which it is welcome that we are in the Chamber, the lights are on and we are all talking — it is not good enough and needs to get better. Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker.”
“While the Budget Bill may not go to a Division, it will be hard for us to jump up and down in ecstatic support for a Bill that authorises spending in the absence of a clear, strategic plan to deal with the crisis in our public services and to get waiting lists down. It does not provide a clear plan for how the Executive will spend money to invest in our waste water infrastructure and rescue public services. Frankly, the public have waited long enough for a plan to see those services rescued and are beyond cynicism with the Executive and these institutions. They deserve better. They deserve a coherent multi-year Budget when one can be delivered. They deserve a strategic plan from the Executive.”
“It is the job of each Committee not simply to get the headlines but to scrutinise exactly what is happening in the relevant Department's finances. Our Finance Committee should provide strategic direction, and I hope that we will do more of that.”
“It is our job to take seriously the scrutiny of such documents and, insofar as we are able to, to understand them. They are not that hideously complicated. One of my great frustrations is that individual Statutory Committees barely scrutinise the documents, because the truth is that they are in a better position than the Finance Committee to understand why money might have moved around in their Departments. Look at some of the changes. For example, when I read the information — I should have had it marked — about a significant adjustment to the Department of Health's capital budget for 2024-25, I find that I am not sure about it. I imagine that it might be connected to the children's hospital debacle, but I do not know, because I am not on the Committee for Health.”
“The suggestion yesterday was that they are hideously complex legislation that will take ages to produce and that officials need more time. To be fair, officials had years in which to produce them when this place was down. A financial provisions Bill and a Fiscal Council Bill are not politically controversial. I am at a loss as to why officials and drafters could not have been drafting those Bills while Ministers were not in office. Executive parties were having meetings about a Programme for Government. Activity was going on, so I presume that those people were still at work. I want to understand when exactly we will have those Bills before us. <BR /> <BR />I will touch on the question of scrutiny. Mr Gaston was right to point out a typographical error in the spring Supplementary Estimates document.”
“That is not the Budget Bill's fault, as that is not what it is there to do. As I have said, the Budget Bill is there simply to authorise spending legally, but the public deserve more than that. They deserve more than our simply marking time, turning up and keeping the lights on and then expecting credit for it. <BR /> <BR />Before I conclude my remarks, I will turn briefly to a couple of specific points on which the Minister touched. He mentioned the use of the so-called black box and on the sole authority of the Budget Act. It is true that those amounts have come down significantly. It is also true that legislation is promised in some areas, specifically a financial provisions Bill and a Fiscal Council Bill. I want to know when those bits of legislation will be introduced in the Assembly.”
“Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. <BR /> <BR />The Budget Bill lists the various areas in which the Executive are spending money, but it offers no prioritisation. A Budget Bill is simply a list of areas in which money is legally spent, but there is no opportunity for the public to know how much money is being spent on reducing waiting lists or how much money is being invested to help our waste water infrastructure recover. I could find the bit in the Budget Bill that mentions funding Northern Ireland Water, because that is in there. I could find the bit in the Budget Bill that mentions funding the health service, because that is all in there. There is, however, no clarity whatever in the Bill on how the Executive will go about prioritising the things that the public care about.”
“I am happy to return to the Budget Bill, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. Of course, I respect any guidance from the Chair. It is important to say that the Bill authorises literally every bit of spending by the Executive. In theory, everything is within the scope of the Budget Bill, because, if there were no Budget Bill, there would be nothing to talk about. I have understood your guidance, however, so I will come back to the —.”
“<BR /> <BR />That is part of a broader, systemic challenge with the Executive, which is, I am afraid, an apparent desire to simply get credit for turning up, keeping the wheels turning and, perhaps, keeping the lights on — marking time, the odd photo op, the odd summit with a nice photo op and some PR around it. There are no clear, decisive targets for improving public services and no clarity for the public on when we will have a plan —.”
“After that, it still has to be agreed, on the basis of what the Minister said, by the Executive. It will then eventually come back to the Floor of the Assembly. By that stage, one assumes, the Budget Bill authorising 45% of spending for the new financial year will already have passed. Will we even be debating the final Budget for 2025-26 before the start of the new financial year? Will the public be able to understand what we are prioritising and how we are allocating resources in order to deal with their priorities? It appears increasingly unlikely.”
“The absence of a clear strategic plan means that this document — the Budget Bill — is only an authorisation of spending: it is not a Budget. I have to say this in my capacity as Chair of the Finance Committee, when I talk to some of my colleagues and even sometimes when I talk to constituents and the media: the Budget Bill is, of course, part of the Budget process, but it is not the Budget. <BR /> <BR />The Budget is the document that we have not yet debated. It was emailed to Members in a written statement just before Christmas. We then got further allocations a couple of weeks ago — again, on a non-sitting day. We have not had a fulsome debate yet in the Chamber on the 2025-26 Budget. The consultation period for the document closes in about three and a half weeks' time.”
“Those are clearly the priorities. <BR /> <BR />There is a Programme for Government — currently in draft form, not signed off and not finalised — with lots of vague descriptive text, but not clear targets. I do not know, so, perhaps, the Minister can update us in his winding-up remarks — maybe other Members from Executive parties can update us — on when the Programme for Government will be finalised. However, even when the Programme for Government is finalised, it should be backed by a coherent and, ideally, multi-year Budget. The Minister, no doubt, will say that a multi-year Budget is not legally possible until Westminster provides him with a multi-year spending review. That is true, but, as I have said and as we have discussed, that does not stop him providing an indicative pathway; indeed, he appears to be moving in that direction.”
“They are effectively like contacting your bank and the bank saying, "We continue the authorisation of the use of your bank account and your overdraft for another few months". It is not a Budget. It is not a strategic statement of how resources will be allocated in order to deliver on the people's priorities. We know what the people's priorities are, roughly speaking, because they are pretty obvious: the crisis in our health service; the fact that we have the worst waiting lists and waiting times not just in these islands but, bluntly, in western Europe; the fact that we have a waste water infrastructure system that is crumbling and preventing basic economic development; the fact that, in other areas of our public services, we are crying out for reform in order to deliver the basics that, in a democracy, the public should expect.”
“I welcome the fact that we are here in the Assembly debating a Budget Bill. It feels as if we are obliged to say that all the time when we are here doing anything. Is it not great that we are here? Is it not great that we are debating a Budget Bill? Is it not great that there is an Executive? Is it not great that we have turned up and done our jobs? The truth is that it is not great. It is the bare minimum. It is what the public expected when they elected us. We need to do more than simply turn up. <BR /> <BR />The reason why the concept of simply turning up is relevant to the Budget Bill is that all the Budget Bill does is authorise spending; it authorises the updated totals and limits that are set out in the spring Supplementary Estimates. That is what Budget Bills do.”
“I gently point out that those Bills were included in the 2024 legislative programme — not the 2024-25 legislative programme, as has been stated in the Assembly — so they are already overdue for introduction by several months. <BR /> <BR />I look forward to Members' contributions during the debate. I will now say a few words in my capacity as leader of the Opposition.”
“<BR /> <BR />The majority of Departments have indicated that legislation is expected in 2025. The Finance Committee has a specific interest in that, as members have been waiting for a financial provisions Bill that will legislate for some elements of the current black box. Additionally, the arrival of a Fiscal Council Bill will remove funding for that body from the black box. The Committee is increasingly frustrated that those Bills have not been introduced. I ask the Minister, on the Committee's behalf, to redouble his efforts to bring those Bills and other legislation that the Committee has been expecting to the Chamber.”
“Beyond that, Royal Assent should be received by 24 March, before the end of the financial year. <BR /> <BR />I now turn to the favourite subject of many Members: the use of the sole authority of the Budget Act or, in the vernacular, the black box. As Members will, no doubt, be aware, any charge on public funds must be authorised by legislation. The majority of expenditure by Departments is supported by specific enabling legislation. If that legislation is not in place, expenditure must generally rely on the sole authority of the Budget Acts. The absence of an Executive and functioning Assembly meant that expenditure that falls into the sole authority category has built up. When the Main Estimates were produced, the total amount of sole authority sought was £28 million. Following updates, the current figure has reduced to £25 million.”
“<BR /> <BR />As Members will recall, the Vote on Account at this point last year was an exceptional 65%. That was due to the place in which we found ourselves, with the sudden restoration of the Executive. This year's figure of 45% is much more usual, providing, as it does, interim resources and funding for the first few months of the 2025-26 financial year until work on the 2025-26 Main Estimates and Budget (No. 2) Bill have been completed. The Vote on Account ensures that departmental business can continue before the Assembly considers the Budget at Main Estimates, prior to summer recess. The Committee has been led to expect that the Consideration Stage of the Budget Bill will be held next Monday, 24 February, with the Further Consideration Stage and the Final Stage both happening on 25 February.”
“That allowed the completion of SSE templates, which required the finalising of departmental expenditure plans, recording on accounting systems, preparing Estimates templates and receiving final internal approvals and clearance from Ministers. That process wrapped up on 23 January 2025. The departmental Supply team then compiled the 18 Estimates across Departments and public bodies, and those are contained in the SSE memorandum. The completion of the 2024-25 SSEs provides a reconciliation between the Main Estimates Budget position and the spring Supplementary Estimates Budget position. Headroom built into the spring Supplementary Estimates gives the Executive the ability to spend any funding yet to be allocated on priority areas and to ensure that no resources are lost to the block grant.”
“This Budget Bill signals that we are coming to the end of the 2024-25 financial year, with departmental accounts comparing their audited return against the limits voted by the Assembly. <BR /> <BR />The 2024-25 Budget began its life on 24 April 2024, following its agreement by the Executive. Following that, the Main Estimates 2024-25 were prepared, and the Budget (No. 2) Act (Northern Ireland) 2024 received Royal Assent on 18 October 2024, so giving Departments the authority to spend. The spring Supplementary Estimates were commissioned on 27 November 2024, and, following the completion of the January monitoring round process, the Executive agreed the final 2024-25 Budget position on 16 January 2025.”
“As Members are aware, Budget Bills provide the statutory means for the Assembly to authorise spending by Departments and issue cash to Departments to fund that expenditure. They also hold Departments accountable for managing and controlling that spending within the limits authorised for the financial year. As I indicated, Budget Bills are supported by the Estimates process, with the January monitoring position agreed by the Executive on 16 January. It is important to stress that Executive Budgets set just the Executive's spending plans. They do not give Departments the legal authority to draw down the use of cash or resources; that is done only through Budget Bills and the associated Supply resolutions.”
“It is always important for us not only to understand the information but to try to unpack and explain it to the wider public and, indeed, our Assembly colleagues.”
“Those are relatively technical matters, but they have, in a technical sense, improved how the Budget process works. I will offer some broader conclusions in my political remarks. <BR /> <BR />During its consideration of the Bill — indeed, during all the evidence sessions on the Budget and related issues — the Committee reflected on the considerable complexity of the Budget process. That tends to be compounded by the liberal use of technical terms and accounting principles that are alien to most people. There is pressure on the Finance Committee to understand the processes and terminology, and I commend Committee members for their diligence in that regard. Even the most dedicated members of the Finance Committee will sometimes find themselves having to penetrate extremely technical terms and concepts.”
“The implementation of the Act has resulted in changes to how financial information is presented in the Estimates and the associated Budget Bill. The most significant changes are the clear alignment of financial information between Budgets, Estimates and Accounts; the expenditure of arm's-length bodies (ALBs), which has always been included in Budgets, is now also consolidated into Estimates and Accounts so that financial information can be directly compared; capital expenditure is now voted directly; separate control limits are voted in the Budget Bill for departmental expenditure limits (DEL) for both current and capital; separate control totals are voted in the Budget Bill for annually managed expenditure (AME) for both current and capital; separate control totals are voted in the Budget Bill for non-Budget expenditure for both current and capital; cash requirements continue to be voted; and, finally, rather than the Department of Finance laying a minute to authorise accruing resources — that is, receipts — the Assembly now authorises the use of income directly in the Budget Bill.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Finance Committee has been commissioning much more detailed information on departmental spending that we have shared with the other Statutory Committees, including monthly returns. The Deputy Chair helped to drive forward that work in Committee. It has significantly enhanced our scrutiny work and, I hope, that of other Committees. It is our job to support other Committees in their scrutiny. We take that job seriously and will continue to invest time in it. <BR /> <BR />The Committee noted that the information provided on the SSEs, the Vote on Account and the Statement of Excesses has improved following the commencement of the Financial Reporting (Departments and Public Bodies) Act (Northern Ireland) 2022.”
“With the Executive restoration package settlement, the interim fiscal framework and significant transfers from Westminster following both its Main and Supplementary Estimate processes, our 2024-25 Budget has seen additional allocations on an almost unprecedented scale. In other good news, the additional funding has been baselined for 2025-26. However, the Committee has been warned by officials that we are not likely to see such inflows going forward. The Committee urges Departments to apply all their efforts to living within their means and to move beyond the culture of overcommitting budgets in the hope that Westminster Estimates will come to the rescue and provide for the shortfall. I will elaborate on that in the remarks that I will make in a party capacity.”
“The Committee noted, following engagement with stakeholders, that our Budgets would be much more strategic and better applied were they linked to a Programme for Government (PFG). Additionally, multi-year Budgets would provide the security to invest and reform, and I am sure that that will come up in today's debate. The Committee has been briefed on work that the Department of Finance is doing that flows from the Budget sustainability plan and the Budget improvement road map, and that should take us towards Budgets that are linked to the PFG and multi-annual Budget plans. The Committee is monitoring that closely and will share the details that it receives with the other Statutory Committees, as per the Committee's role as Budget lead. <BR /> <BR />The Committee is acutely aware that this has been a bumper year for Barnett consequentials.”
“While every Budget Bill has been given accelerated passage, when there has been an Assembly to pass a Budget Bill, Members were uncomfortable with the phrase "appropriate consultation". Without a Committee Stage, the Committee is not in a position to provide input to the Bill. Members are supportive of the current wording of Standing Order 42(2) being reviewed to be more reflective of the reality of the situation. That said, Members are grateful to officials for their briefing. <BR /> <BR />Members will appreciate that, as a devolved legislature, we are subject to actions and timescales at Westminster for the allocation of our Budget and the Estimates processes to which it is subject.”
“At that point, the Committee had had sight of the draft Bill. The Committee's agreement to accelerated passage is predicated on "appropriate consultation" as per Standing Order 42(2). Additionally, granting accelerated passage to the Bill will compromise paragraph 20 of strand one of the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement and paragraph 64(1) of the Northern Ireland Act 1998.”
“There was considerable debate about the basis for that agreement, and while consensus was reached in support of accelerated passage, some Committee members did not support that. They will articulate their views when it is their turn to speak, as I will in my capacity as leader of the Opposition in a moment. I am sure that all Members will agree that, in principle, accelerated passage is not an ideal way to do business. However, it is worth saying that the nature of Budget processes means that any Budget Bill is unlikely to pass in requisite time without accelerated passage. <BR /> <BR />The Finance Committee received a briefing on the Bill, as well as on the spring Supplementary Estimates for 2024-25, the Vote on Account for 2025-26 and the Statement of Excesses for 2023-24, at its meeting on Wednesday 12 February.”
“I also thank his predecessor, Dr Caoimhe Archibald, for her work in the role and, indeed, for the assistance that she gave the Committee. She was open in her communications and constructive with the Committee. We wish her well in her new portfolio. I say to the new Minister that the Committee wants to conduct its relations with him in the spirit of trust, candour and positive engagement, as it did with Dr Archibald. Indeed, we will engage in robust debate, as we did yesterday. I am sure that we will engage in that again later today. <BR /> <BR />First, I turn to the request for the Committee's agreement that the Budget Bill 2025 receives accelerated passage. The Committee arrived at a consensus to agree that the Bill be granted accelerated passage. However, Members should not assume that that was a formality.”
“I think that all of us on the Committee would acknowledge that Diane's experience as an auditor has been professionally useful and has added to our scrutiny work. That demonstrates the importance of that kind of professional expertise. Frankly, at times, all parties will have political disagreements, but we also need that non-partisan ability to scrutinise. <BR /> <BR />I also acknowledge that Mr Gaston was quite right in pointing out the error in the document. I hope that it is a typographical error rather than a substantive error. It is our job to come here and scrutinise the documents in front of us, not simply wave them through. <BR /> <BR />I thank the Minister for his comments and use this opportunity to formally place on record the Committee's congratulations to him on his recent appointment as Finance Minister.”
“I will begin by speaking as Chair of the Finance Committee, and I will then give some views from my perspective as leader of the Opposition. It is worth pointing out, as I had to yesterday, that there is an issue with Opposition speaking rights and Chairperson speaking rights that either the Speaker's Office or the Procedures Committee need to examine. That procedural issue does not arise today because this is an untimed debate. <BR /> <BR />As I said, I will begin by speaking as Chair of the Finance Committee and reflect the Committee's viewpoint as broadly as possible. I thank the Deputy Chair, Diane Forsythe, for speaking on the Committee's behalf during the debate on the Supply resolutions yesterday.”
“Is part of the alternative more fiscal devolution, as I talked to him about earlier, and producing plans for how we can raise more revenue here, take more powers here and, ultimately, take more of the power away from London?”
“I appreciate the Minister giving way, and I genuinely welcome the fact that he is up for debate on this. That is to his credit. He talks about coming forward with an alternative: I agree with him. That is why, as an Opposition, we have asked for money to be prioritised. We have tried to come up with alternatives. Does that also go for him and other Executive Ministers? He is right to say that he wants more money from London and that austerity has been terrible over the past 15 years: we agree with that as the Opposition. However, is it not the case that there is a limit to what the Treasury — he and I want a different constitutional future — will do and how much it will listen?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I go back to his earlier remarks. On the prioritisation of Health and the state of the health service, we, as the Opposition, have always said that the Executive's priority needs to be to give Health not just a budget but a budget next to a clear plan to get waiting lists down. That is what the public care about. They do not so much care about the volume of money that goes to Health; they care about the outcome. When will the Health Minister produce a clearly communicable plan to the public for when waiting lists will come down? That would be really helpful.”