DRD running away -Allister
09 September 2008
Following the expose of Minister Murphy's slight of hand in republicanising an Executive-approved document, behind the backs of his colleagues, I wrote to the Permanent Secretary of DRD with the following seven pertinent questions:-
1. Is it acceptable that changes, said by the First Minister to number 157, were indeed made to the documentation within DRD after its approval by the Executive?
2. Who decided these changes would be made and when?
3. Please describe the process by which these changes were made and the involvement and oversight of civil servants therein.
4. Was there any liaison or contact with the Secretary of the Executive, or OFMDFM, or anyone outside DRD about the fact that such changes were made, or were going to be made. If not, why not?
5. Were you aware the changes were being made, if not at what civil service level was there such knowledge?
6. Why did you permit such changes to be made, knowing, as I presume you did, such would alter the documentation from what was approved by the Executive?
7. Was the documentation, as altered, subjected to any equality assessment or Section 75 evaluation, or was the equality impact of what was being done otherwise considered?
Today I have received an unsolicited reply from Minister Murphy which is an exercise in obfuscation and issue avoidance. Instead of answering the questions he utterly avoids them to confirm only that the RDS documentation "was developed and published" under his ministerial direction. I have responded to both the Permanent Secretary and the Head of the Civil Service insisting that my reasonable questions are answered. Having previously had an Ombudsman's finding against this Executive for their treatment of correspondence, I will not be letting this matter rest.
The major challenge here, however, is for the First Minister. He has laid his authority on the line by rightly demanding that Murphy withdraw the tainted document. To date Murphy hasn't even replied to his letter. So, what will Mr Robinson do now to prove that St Andrews did indeed prevent ministers from doing such solo runs? The Assembly won't help him because the Sinn Fein veto will protect Murphy. The High Court is the only forum which can compel Murphy to back down, if he continues to defy the First Minister and his colleagues. Will the First Minister see his threat through, or will he back away and let Murphy off with doing what he likes, when such is supposed to be no longer possible?
ENDS
