Tag Archives: Northern Ireland Affairs committee

Northern Ireland’s political institutions: time for change?

Posted on by

The Commons Northern Ireland Affairs Committee has published a report on the effectiveness of the institutions established by the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement. Alan Whysall argues that it is a much-needed contribution to informed debate. Its proposals for institutional change are unlikely to be implemented as cast. But similar reforms may be essential to the survival of the Agreement settlement.

Politics in Northern Ireland has been deadlocked for almost two years, leaving the institutions established by the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement unable to function. The Assembly does not meet; ministers have not been appointed to form an Executive; government is carried on by civil servants with very limited powers, with occasional interventions from London; there is financial disarray.

The leader of the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), Jeffrey Donaldson, whose veto has led to the deadlock, has appeared for some months to be edging towards lifting it, despite profound differences of view between DUP leadership figures. Matters seemed to be coming to a head last week following publication of a British government offer to the main political parties of a financial package if devolution resumes. But it is now clear there will be no DUP decision before Christmas – although the Secretary of State, while announcing an improved financial package, declared that talks on resuming devolution were over: the government’s final offer was on the table. 

Into this context, the Commons Northern Ireland Affairs Committee published a timely report on the functioning of – and possible reforms to – the Agreement institutions. Though the report passed largely unnoticed outside Northern Ireland, this is much more than geekery. Institutional reforms may be essential to ensuring stable and effective government in the future, whatever the result of the current negotiations. Change will not be easy, however: the DUP opposed the report’s recommendations, and Sinn Féin appears cool towards them (see below). So the consensus that has generally been sought for changes to the Agreement is by no means present.

Continue reading →

How Sunak can restore integrity, professionalism and accountability

Posted on by

Meg Russell, Alan Renwick, Sophie Andrews-McCarroll and Lisa James argue that for Rishi Sunak to keep his promise to put integrity, professionalism and accountability at the heart of his government, he must strengthen the standards system, enhance parliamentary scrutiny, defend the rule of law, abide by constitutional norms and defend checks and balances.

In his first speech as Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak promised to put integrity, professionalism and accountability in government at the heart of his premiership. This promise is to be warmly welcomed – commentators and experts have raised consistent alarms about slipping constitutional standards in recent years, and research shows that the public care deeply about honesty and integrity in their politicians.

But what might such a pledge look like in reality? Against the backdrop of Boris Johnson’s resignation this summer, precipitated by concerns about his approach to standards, integrity and accountability, an earlier post on this blog issued five questions for the then leadership candidates to address on rebuilding constitutional standards and restoring integrity. The subsequent premiership of Liz Truss aptly demonstrated these questions’ continuing relevance. This new post returns to the five core tasks, links them to Sunak’s stated goals, and suggests what his government might do to meet them. It demonstrates close agreement with proposals by respected experts from other bodies in response to Sunak’s pledge.

1. Strengthening the standards system

The system for maintaining government and parliamentary standards was placed under great stress during the Johnson premiership. Successive Independent Advisers on Ministers’ Interests resigned, ministers unwisely attempted to derail a House of Commons Committee on Standards investigation, and a Privileges Committee inquiry into whether Johnson himself misled parliament is ongoing. Truss’s subsequent claim that her personal integrity was a sufficient bulwark against standards breaches fell far short of the serious commitment to institutional arrangements needed to safeguard integrity.

Continue reading →