Advertisement
BBC BLOGS - The Devenport Diaries
« Previous | Main | Next »

Not so fast

Mark Devenport | 15:50 UK time, Tuesday, 4 August 2009

This morning Mervyn Storey and Jim Allister graced our airwaves to outline how they had decided to set their TUV DUP differences aside in order to avoid costing the ratepayers £25,000 by triggering a by-election in Ballymoney and the same again with a repeat performance in Craigavon. The deal as outlined meant the DUP could co-opt a replacement for Roy Wilson in Ballymoney and the TUV could do the same for their councillor Mark Russell in Craigavon.

However this afternoon Sinn Fein weighed in telling both unionist parties "not so fast". They have accused the DUP and TUV of "breathtaking arrogance". Sinn Fein's threat of a by-election is tied to the TUV's opposition to republicans co-opting a replacement for John O'Dowd.

According to SF Councillor Mairead O'Dowd "The facts of the matter are that Sinn Féin has been seeking to co-opt a replacement for Councillor John O'Dowd MLA for a considerable time in line with our policy of ending dual mandates between the Council and the Assembly. Throughout that time we have been reliably informed that the only Councillor who would object to such a co-option would be Mark Russell and that he would force a by-election in such circumstances at a cost of £25,000 to the ratepayer. The same Mark Russell now tells us that he will himself be co-opted off the Council because the DUP and the TUV have a cosy deal which, quite frankly, is worthless."

Sinn Fein wants any arrangement to include them, but the TUV has responded that if republicans force a by-election in Craigavon "we'll happily fight and beat them". the TUV says it won't seek or give any favours to Sinn Fein.

So potentially the TUV could find its deal drops apart and the ratepayers are still stung for £25,000.

Having said that it won't be the only thing ratepayers and taxpayers have to fork out for in the coming months. Clearing my desk I found the consultation paper for the severance arrangements for councillors losing their posts as part of the move from 26 to 11 councils. At a rate of £1,000 per year per councillor up to a maximum of 36 years' service the paper estimates the cost of these pay offs as anything between £5,247,000 and £4,196,000. How much depends on whether a councillor is eligible for a pay off after serving two terms or three terms.

The legislation which will provide for the severance package was introduced into the Assembly at the end of June. The consultation on the pay offs closed at the end of May but we won't know the precise details of what the Environment department intends to implement until later this year.

On the department's website you can read a synopsis of responses to the proposed pay offs. It says that 27 of those who responded were in favour of a pay off, and all but 3 of them were councils, councillors or local government organisations. The 4 members of the public who wrote in were all against, as was one councillor who argued that "there was no justification for the scheme and that it was likely to be unpopular given the current criticism about MPs' use of expenses".

Comments

or register to comment.

  • 1. At 7:14pm on 04 Aug 2009, Stormontspy wrote:

    Mark,

    How Jim Allister and Mervyn Storey came to an agreement is a mystery. Listening to them this morning it sums up politics in general. Throw in Sinn Fein's statement and we have our usual mix of tribal politics!!

    Where do you get your quotes from Jim Allister? Is it by phone or press statement? To date Jim is yet to put anything on to his websites. Mark I also asked last week was there any truth to claims Jim made about an arms find in Magherafelt being linked to the IRA. Judging by today's spin I guess Jim was somewhat just stirring the pot.

    The sooner local politicians are consigned to the dust bins and direct rule returned the better. Just think if all MLA's and Councillors were given their P45's we would have more money for hospitals, roads and front line services. Those bluffers on the hill are denying us our basic needs by lining their own pockets.

    Stormontspy

    Complain about this comment

  • 2. At 11:36pm on 04 Aug 2009, Nevin wrote:

    "part of the move from 26 to 11 councils."

    Something else you might wish to watch, Mark. Some councillors might be tempted to sell off 'surplus' council assets cheaply to their associates in the private sector during the next few years.

    Complain about this comment

  • 3. At 12:41pm on 05 Aug 2009, patrick_78 wrote:

    The TUV and DUP have for months been ridiculing and calling each other traitors, talking how one party would replace the other. Yet now, they smarm up to each other and try to create a sneaky deal that benefits both to the detriment of democracy. Very disappointing behaviour all round.

    Complain about this comment

  • 4. At 4:41pm on 06 Aug 2009, traditional_unionist wrote:

    I cannot support Jim Allister or the TUV in this decision. I believe in democracy and not dirty deals with a party like the DUP

    But then this country seems to be allergic to democracy

    Complain about this comment

  • 5. At 10:59am on 08 Aug 2009, Stormontspy wrote:

    Traditional Unionist,

    What are you going to do about it? Why is it the TUV are happy to cosy up to the DUP and Sinn Fein in councils but not in the Assembly? For months we have seen Jim laugh at the DUP and now he is their buddy in councils. Quite Pathetic

    Stormontspy

    Complain about this comment

View these comments in RSS

Explore the BBC

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.