Allister questions if Budget process can now be legally concluded
13 January 2011
Statement by TUV Leader Jim Allister QC:
“On 15th December 2010 the Executive announced a partial budget, but with no savings or spending information. Thus it was not a proper Budget at all. However, the Finance Minister promised that each department would publish the missing savings and spending elements within a week. This promise was not kept and even now several departments, including OFMDFM, have failed to publish any plans and those who have are scant on detail.
“Meanwhile, the 8 week consultation clock is ticking and for some departments hasn’t even begun. It is clear from what the Finance Minister said in his Budget statement that in fact there are 12 consultations involved, one for each department, not just a single omnibus consultation. The Minister said, “The public consultation process will now begin…... This process will not be lead by DFP but by individual Departments who will now publish their savings plans and spending proposals.”
“Thus, it seems inevitable that each Department’s plans require the minimum 8 week consultation. It would be wholly destructive of the ethos and bona fides of consultation if a Department which delayed for 6 weeks could piggy back on a consultation triggered by a more expeditious department, but in effect only give 2 weeks for comment on its proposals.
“The High Court has been clear about what is required in a genuine consultation process. In a Judicial review in 2007 Mr Justice Weatherup quoted with approval these four requirements:
“To be proper, consultation must be undertaken at a time when proposals are still at a formative stage; it must include sufficient reasons for particular proposals to allow those consulted to give intelligent consideration and an intelligent response; adequate time must be given for this purpose; and the product of consultation must be conscientiously taken into account when the ultimate decision is taken.”
It is, therefore hard to see how a consultation process truncated to a week or two could ever pass this judicial test. In consequence, I believe, the Executive’s budgetary process is in trouble.
“This Assembly is due to be dissolved on 22 March, less than 10 weeks away. With several departments yet to go to consultation, how can the timetable be met if the product of any consultation is to be “conscientiously taken into account” before the ultimate decision on the draft budget is taken?
“This mess is entirely of the Executive’s own making. It is the product of the hopeless deadlock and foot-dragging which typifies everything this failed Executive touches.
“I sense from his comments earlier in the week that the Finance Minister realises the process is in difficulties. If he has not already done so he needs to take urgent legal advice, because the law requires budget setting to be lawful.
“Fiscal management is the core responsibility of any government, yet on this most fundamental duty this Stormont is floundering and failing. Under Direct Rule at its worst we never had such a mess.”
