Opinion

ANALYSIS: Promises of a new approach ring hollow

Foreign Affairs Minister Simon Coveney (left) and the then Secretary of State Julian Smith herald New Decade New Approach. Picture by Niall Carson/PA Wire
Foreign Affairs Minister Simon Coveney (left) and the then Secretary of State Julian Smith herald New Decade New Approach. Picture by Niall Carson/PA Wire Foreign Affairs Minister Simon Coveney (left) and the then Secretary of State Julian Smith herald New Decade New Approach. Picture by Niall Carson/PA Wire

THE New Decade New Approach deal that saw the Stormont institutions restored after a three year hiatus was designed to be a document that reflected optimism and a step change in attitude. Ushering in a power-sharing reboot that sought to banish previous dysfunction, it included countless agreed proposals that aimed transform and normalise the regional administration. The lack of oversight that enabled the RHI scandal to happen would be remedied through an augmented ministerial code and civil service reform, while legislative inertia would be tackled through changes to the petition of concern, a mechanism designed to prevent majority rule that had become a ‘Joker’, played regularly to impede progress or subvert the democratic process.

NDNA’s list of aspirations was effectively an indictment of devolution’s failings over the previous decade. Reading over it two years later it’s hard not to regard it at best as wishful thinking and at worst an assortment of expedient pledges that helped the DUP and Sinn Féin out of a hole. Both parties had suffered setbacks in the Westminster election less than a month before, with the absence of an executive widely cited as the reason for a sharp drop off in support.

But it would appear that no sooner were the key protagonists reinstated than they reverted to the old ways. The silo mentality, party political interests and the daily bickering that characterised the post-St Andrews era prevailed, as Stormont’s ‘big two’ retreated into their respective wings at Parliament Buildings and adopted an approach that was all too familiar.

It’s a situation that particularly suits the DUP, as its reactionary tendencies sit more comfortably with terminal deadlock. With its number of seats diminished and the assembly’s unionist majority gone, the party is longer able to call the shots in the manner to which it had become accustomed – though it can still stall progress. This is why the British government and Westminster has been forced to intervene over the head of the devolved institutions on issues like abortion and the Irish language.

Yet equally there doesn’t appear to be any great desire from Sinn Féin to implement the deal in a hurry. Promises about reform, executive openness and collective responsibility have proved hollow, while any changes that have taken place appear to have been adopted begrudgingly.

In mitigation, Stormont is a clunky mandatory coalition, often pulling in different directions. It’s also important to acknowledge the impact of the pandemic and the instability caused by unionist agitation against the protocol. However, there’s only so much inaction that can be accounted for by Covid, which too often is used as cover for risk aversion in the run-up to an election. Meanwhile, the British government that jettisoned Julian Smith soon after he oversaw the deal, has pursued a unilateral agenda on legacy, while dragging its feet on the elements of NDNA for which it has responsibility.

May’s assembly election potentially offers the greatest challenge to the status quo for a generation. Only when power is no longer taken for granted and complacency challenged at the polls will we perhaps see a genuine new approach.