Stormont will be back, sooner or later. The danger is that it comes back too easily, with its inherent instability unresolved.
It was clear from comments at the Labour Party conference two weeks ago that reform of large party vetoes will not be attempted. The DUP and Sinn Fein are against it and Hilary Benn, Labour’s new shadow Northern Ireland secretary, said reform will not work if it has to be imposed. The government has already said the same.
Sir Jeffrey Donaldson, the DUP leader, wants devolution restored sooner rather than later. Any doubt on that was dispelled at his party’s conference last weekend, when he warned delegates that devolution was essential to “make the positive case for the Union”.
Donaldson has since said that talks with London over the Windsor framework are in their final weeks. Choreographed briefings indicate that there could be a reduction in sea border paperwork and a new “east-west council” for the UK and its devolved administrations. These are desperate fig leaves: less paperwork will not meet Donaldson’s seven tests and an east-west council has existed in various forms since 1999 — it was reconstituted only last year in an attempt to raise its profile. Ironically, Sinn Fein could veto Stormont taking part.
The DUP’s real win may be a deal about money. It wants an update to the Treasury’s regional funding mechanism, the Barnett formula, to guarantee that Stormont’s budget is permanently a quarter higher per head than equivalent spending in England.
Advertisement
Wales secured a similar deal a decade ago, so this is a realistic objective. In return, the Treasury would expect Stormont to demonstrate financial discipline and raise more of its own revenue.
The DUP will also be seeking a one-off cash injection for crisis-hit public services, especially health. The other executive parties — Sinn Fein, Alliance and the UUP — would have to be brought into these discussions at some point, perhaps with Dublin joining London to co-chair them. Then everyone should troop back to work with promises to behave better and never walk out again.
This could be a description of the 2020 New Decade, New Approach deal, which ended Stormont’s last collapse. Although it did not consider the Barnett formula, that agreement included many other measures with a comparable purpose.
A Same Decade, Same Approach deal would have no more chance of enduring — maybe less. Serious efforts were made in 2020 to address the veto issue by creating lengthy cooling-off periods for disputes and boycotts. Thanks to these changes, caretaker ministers were still in office nine months after Paul Givan, the DUP first minister, resigned. Previously, everything would have collapsed in one or two weeks. Yet it made no difference: Stormont collapsed anyway. One consequence is that walking out has gone from a near-unthinkable nuclear option to a pattern. That alone increases the likelihood of recurrence.
For now, it appears an executive will be restored with the usual heartbreaking enthusiasm and determination to improve. This will be all that holds it together until the next disaster. The parties entitled to office have been measuring the curtains, giving strong indications of which departments they would prefer.
Advertisement
Sinn Fein wants the Department for the Economy, a DUP fiefdom for most of its history, never before held by a nationalist minister. The republican party plans to use this to launch an ambitious industrial strategy.
The DUP could take finance, to own the Barnett issue, and education, to own various culture war and wedge issues. Alliance wants infrastructure, a notoriously obstinate department that has seen off every other party.
Triggers for the next collapse are easy to foresee. The Windsor framework remains a minefield of problems and controversies. The DUP might be unable to live with it, or become so obstructive that Sinn Fein walks out instead.
There could be a Sinn Fein-led government in Dublin in a little over a year, pressing London for border poll commitments and trying to implement all-Ireland policies. The DUP might be unable to live with this, or republicans might walk out if London or the DUP fail to co-operate. Sinn Fein must envisage some strategic advantage to using its veto in the future or it would not be making itself look ridiculous by defending the DUP’s veto today.
Or perhaps the trigger will be relatively mundane. Sinn Fein blocked executive business for three years from 2012 because it did not want to be seen implementing welfare reform. Eventually, the DUP became so frustrated that it threatened to walk out.
Advertisement
The way this was resolved, in the 2015 Fresh Start agreement, was revealing. Sinn Fein agreed to “undevolve” the relevant powers, enabling London to implement the reforms. Other nationalist parties, north and south, thought they could crucify Sinn Fein for this ploy but the public quickly moved on. The final significant phase of welfare reform in Northern Ireland, transferring 71,000 people to universal credit, began last week. It was widely reported, yet there was no political reaction. An issue that paralysed Stormont for much of the past decade has been completely defused.
This should be considered a legitimate approach to improving the stability of devolution. The all-party talks about to take place on restoration will be followed, should they succeed, by more long-term deliberation on reforming Stormont’s rules. The Belfast agreement requires such reform to be under constant consideration.
If vetoes cannot be removed, undevolving deadlocked issues should be an available alternative to collapse. It need not always mean passing powers to London. Intractable tasks could be passed to independent bodies within Northern Ireland. This solution is increasingly discussed in the health sector, where ministers have proved incapable of making unpopular but vital decisions to rationalise hospital services.
Despite Donaldson’s conference warning, sometimes there is a positive case for a little bit less devolution. It should not be a difficult case for any unionist to make.
