Damian O'Loan (Paris): The Damian Green scandal betrays a contempt for democracy that has similarities to that practised by the Stormont executive, and the shared Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister in particular. They have most recently called for parliamentary questions to be reduced to once per month, alternating between Sinn Fein and DUP ministers, of which there are four in the Department.
While the debate on PMQs has been marked by the need to improve a system that is not allowing parliament to fully play its role, this proposal is based on little more the most Hobbesian of foundations. Stormont houses an infant and fragile democracy. It is inconsistent to sell stability to American investors on the one hand, as those very ministers have been doing, and meanwhile to launch an attack on the equilibrium of that most crucial of triumvirates: executive,
legislature and judiciary.
Since its inception, these are traits which have marked the first Assembly under the control of these two parties. The parliamentary oversight committee to the department has suffered from the late receipt of papers from the beginning. This has been complained about by the three main parties outside the department and on the Committee. Such papers involve, for example, the business case for the controversial Maze stadium and the associated conflict resolution centre. Millions of pounds of public money are regularly approved for spending on the basis of a few hours oversight and minimal counter-argument.
This would be less concerning were it convincing that the material provided were at all the work of elected representatives. Yet when one looks at the hundreds of pages produced weekly for oversight and the parliamentary question responses, it is not clear that what is being said has not been prepared by civil servants whose responsibilities lie to Whitehall, not the Assembly's electorate.
The proposal has other precedents. The most significant pieces of legislation thus passed have been the budget and the farcical creation of the Commission for Victims and Survivors. The former was published, in the face of united opposition, without equality impact assessment, a key component of the peace agreements. The process finally closed in April, the matter having been promised utmost attention in January; the report remains unpublished.
The Victims Commission legislation was eventually passed by emergency legislation, thereby circumventing the oversight committee, a technique also used to redefine local government boundaries. After several years of litigation, the failure to agree on a candidate led to four full-salary posts being created. The legal actions continue.
Last month the evangelical First Minister, following similar governmental misconceptions by his senior party colleague and wife Iris, declined to support the separation of church and state:
“There are those who want to see Biblical Christianity excluded from the political arena, but such exclusion would be to the detriment of our society, where Judeo-Christian ethics and themes form the basis of our legal system and way of life.”
The Assembly represents the only alternative to dissident republicanism. Treating it with respect is in both parties' interest, as much as the electorate's. Mandatory coalition is a good basis to weaken the powers of parliament, and disproportionately strengthen those of the executive. Moreover, relatively weaker devolved parliaments could also harm the roles at Westminster. These proposals ought to be resisted with due regard for the nature of democracy and stability.
