Is Question Time a vital opportunity for Members of the Legislative Assembly to question and scrutinise their colleagues in the Assembly’s Executive (the Ministers) or a waste of time?
Two examples from this week. On Monday, I sat beside robin Swann, who was curious about where £40 million of your money was going. He thought Martin McGuinness might know …… this is the Official record of his question, and the Deputy First Minister’s answer:
Mr Swann: With regard to the social investment fund, will the deputy First Minister outline the definition of “dereliction”, which, according to the draft PFG, will be allocated half of the £80 million of the total fund?
Mr M McGuinness: It is very important that people recognise that we are dealing with an issue where in many different parts of the North there is an incredible amount of dereliction. With regard to the employment situation in different communities, there is a huge body of work to be tackled and undertaken.The social investment fund is designed to face up to all the challenges that are clearly there. In the consultation, we sought the views of local communities because we believe that local communities know best. In the course of the consultation, we will take on board all the views, including the different interpretations, of local communities about what social dereliction and unemployment mean for them. At the end of that process, after analysis, we will put together programmes that fit the particular circumstances in individual areas. They will not be the same right across the North. In all those areas, we will find considerable differences.
Are you any clearer?
Yesterday, I wondered how the Pay As You Go pilot scheme for home heating oil works. PAYG for oil may be a very valuable initiative. 70% of our homes rely on oil for heating, and half of all our homes are in fuel poverty PAYG may offer an alternative to those who can only afford the 25 litre oil drums available at retail outlets like petrol stations – those drums are very expensive on a price per litre basis, over twice the per litre cost of a 900 litre fill. What I wanted to know was ….. what I asked. Again, what follows is the Official, Hansard record:
Mr Nesbitt: I return to the pay-as-you-go pilot scheme. Will the Minister offer some clarity on the ownership of the oil in the domestic tanks of people who will use the pay-as-you-go technology? Specifically, in the event of theft, will the supplier or the consumer bear the risk?
Mr McCausland: During the pilot scheme, the oil tank will be fitted with an anti-tamper device to prevent that happening. Any persistent interference would mean that that householder is removed from the pilot scheme.
So, you tell me, who owns the oil?
Interestingly, Mr Speaker never seems to criticise a Minister for not answering the question, but is swift to step in when he thinks the question itself is unfair. From Monday alone, here are no fewer than seven interventions, all critical of the MLA doing the asking:
Mr Speaker: Order. I will leave it to the deputy First Minister to respond, but supplementary questions need to relate to the original question. This particular supplementary question certainly has taken some legs. I really have to say that to the Member.
Mr Speaker: I encourage the Member to come to his question.
Mr Speaker: Order. I know that Members have imaginative minds when it comes to supplementary questions. Certainly, that supplementary question has very little to do with the original question. I will leave it to the Minister to decide whether he wants to answer, but, on this occasion, the Member has gone outside the original question.
Mr Speaker: Order. Once again, the Member knows fine well that he is totally out of order. The question that he has asked the Minister has absolutely nothing to do with the original question. Let us move on.
Mr Speaker: Do we have a question from the Member?
Mr Speaker: Do I detect a question there somewhere?
Mr Speaker: Order. I would like to hear this Member ask a supplementary question that might relate to the original question.
So, what do you think of Question Time? A essential part of the democratic process, or a tax-payer funded waste of time? By the way, I am sure the Speaker is only applying the current rules, so it is not an attack on him. It’s the system I would like to see changed.
A lot of words but no communication, in the traditional political style, speaks a lot but says nothing or nothing that can be understood, who else but the deputy first minister.
Whilst it leaves a lot to be desired the democratic process is the best we’ve got. Sorry Mike, but most of our politicians are amateurs and still have a lot to learn – they’re are exceptions who actually remember who put them up on the hill and thank goodness for that. It remains that most of the craft has been learnt from Civil service who can certainly string a few words together to say nothing.