---

Northern Ireland Bill

I put it to the hon. Gentleman absolutely straightforwardly—I hope that he will not take this in the wrong spirit—that where I and my constituents pay, on average, £1,300 a year in water charges and household council tax, he and his constituents pay some £600 a year in water contributions and household rates. So they are paying less than half what Scottish, Welsh and English Members and their constituents are paying. That is not sustainable if we want a proper, modern water and sewerage system in Northern Ireland that meets future needs and provides clean water and beaches. Moreover, if we want to release up £200 million-worth of spending to put into health and education, we need to raise more finance locally. The same point applies to the rates. That gap—Northern Ireland’s households contributing less than half what Great Britain’s households contribute—is simply not defensible or sustainable. The key purpose of the Assembly is to pave the way for a devolved Executive, by electing a First Minister and Deputy First Minister; and then running the d’Hondt process. When all concerned have affirmed the pledge of office, including the commitment to exclusively democratic and peaceful means, the Bill requires me immediately to make an order restoring devolved government. The newly selected Executive would take up office, and the Assembly would have all its powers and responsibilities restored. The direct rule powers would come to an end; indeed, they would be repealed from the statute book. If restoration is achieved, we have provided that the Assembly’s life should be prolonged for a year beyond May 2007, when an election was due. That is not the sort of step to be taken lightly, but it makes no sense, having laboured for years to restore an Executive, for its members then immediately to have to focus on pre-election positioning and campaigning, instead of focusing on the difficult process of self-government. It is going to be hard enough to build the trust and experience necessary to make the new arrangements work without electoral politics intervening. Of course, some parties are seeking changes to the arrangements under which devolution would operate. Much the best way forward would be for the parties in the Assembly to resolve those issues among themselves. Under devolution, the Assembly achieved remarkable things with all the parties working together, and in that spirit I am sure that we could overcome the remaining obstacles. We as a Government of course stand ready to contribute to discussions on those issues, and to give effect to the outcome. But accommodation among all the parties is what matters. If we do not get an Executive by 24 November, the Bill is absolutely unequivocal. The Assembly Members will go home, the May 2007 elections will not take place and, from 24 November, the Assembly Members will receive no pay, though the powers governing that already exist and do not depend on the Bill. We do not believe that it would be justified to pay Members of the Legislative Assembly any resettlement allowance. After three and a half years on generous pay without having been able to carry out their role, the public would not accept MLAs receiving golden handshakes. It has been put to me that MLAs could face some unavoidable costs, arising after the November deadline, associated with the closure of their offices and the release of their staff. There are existing arrangements for those to be reimbursed strictly on the basis of receipted claims. Suggestions that that means a £16,000 retirement package in the back pocket of every MLA are completely misguided. Frankly, however, I am not particularly sympathetic to even those winding up arrangements for office rent, staff and so on. The public are heartily sick of taxpayers’ money being doled out to MLAs who will not do their jobs by working together like all other elected politicians across the world.