.gif)
As the Northern Ireland Assembly breaks for Christmas recess, there is some speculation that Finance Minister Máirtín Ó Muilleoir may ask for it to be recalled later this month to discuss the budget for 2017-18.
A possible overspend of £400million on the Renewable Heat Incentive Scheme (RHI) has dogged the First Minister on her visit to China, as well as continuing issues over the Social Investment Fund will see the Arlene Foster greatly look forward to the holidays. Similarly, the deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness will welcome the break having been forced to pull out of the China visit on health grounds.
Currently under the scrutiny of the Assembly’s Public Accounts Committee, the RHI inquiry raises significant issues around the management, governance and financial cost of a scheme which was only formally closed in February 2016. Estimates suggest that the overall cost of the scheme to the public purse could be more than £1billion.
Launched to the non-domestic sector in 2012 and later to domestic households, the RHI was aimed at encouraging businesses and households to switch to eco-friendly heating sources. The Northern Ireland scheme, which had no cap or payment tier system, deviated from similar approaches introduced in England and it soon became apparent that scheme users were being incentivised for a greater amount than the value of the fuel burnt. Unsurprisingly thousands signed up and a whistle-blower claims one farmer is in line to receive £1million in incentives for heating an empty shed. It’s also been alleged that concerns about the scheme had been raised with Arlene Foster as Enterprise, Trade and Investment Minister back in 2013.
The Public Accounts Committee, which usually does not comment on ongoing investigations, has expressed shock at the evidence that it has seen and heard so far. The scheme has dominated the press over the last week and led to opposition politicians such as UUP leader Mike Nesbitt calling for the First Minister to consider her position.
Elsewhere, lawyers for Northern Ireland’s anti-leave politicians and a victims’ campaigner made representations at the Supreme Court. Their case, originally rejected by the Northern Ireland High Court, was allowed to be considered as part of the Supreme Court’s hearing on Brexit. Their argument centred on the premise that the citizens of Northern Ireland should have to give consent to leaving the EU before the UK government triggers Article 50. John Larkin, Northern Ireland’s Attorney General also appeared at the Supreme Court in an independent role rather than in his role as legal advisor to the Northern Ireland Executive. Mr Larkin adopted a contrary approach, advising that the constitutional arrangements underpinning devolution should not stand in the way of the Government triggering Article 50.
Whilst the Christmas break may be a welcome one, the outcomes of these issues will certainly provide an unsavoury hangover for some into 2017.