THE anniversary of the optimistically named Fresh Start agreement came and went last week and you'll be forgiven for thinking that not a lot changed in the last 12 months.
And while you'd be right in one respect it should be acknowledged that we have entered a more mature cycle of politics.
There is now an official opposition in Stormont. The coalition would have you believe the opposition benches are toothless and have opted out but as a journalist I can assure you they are providing scrutiny and oversight that didn't previously exist.
Take the controversy surrounding the Social Investment Fund, £80 million of your money dished out in sometimes unethical fashion.
There are steering groups packed with allies who recommend groups, some of which the steering group members themselves actually work for.
Journalists in this paper, the Sunday Life, The Detail and the BBC have been probing this controversial and questionable way of dishing out funding for a number of years, but it is only in the last few months when the opposition came on board and started pushing the issue up in Stormont that the executive were shamed into making statements on the 'slush fund'.
Martin McGuinness and Arlene Foster have also adopted a more mature working relationship, something that was non existent in the Peter Robinson era.
Just this week they issued a joint mission statement of plans for the future, again unthinkable during the Robinson period.
During that time of political hostility a press officer for the Office of the First and Deputy First Minister once told me I'd only hear back in relation to a query I'd submitted if he could get McGuinness and Robinson to agree on a joint response. He concluded the conversation by saying, "they never agree so don't expect to hear back from me".
That just about sums up that particular period of government and while we've moved on there are still important outstanding issues.
The two halves of the coalition have different views when it comes to the definition of a victim and you know what, that's fine, people are allowed to disagree.
What they should not be allowed to do is continue to defer progress on issues that for some deeply traumatised victims are matters of life and death.
There's only so much lack of political progress in the north that can be blamed on the 'Brits' and at some point the devolved administration need to take responsibility.
A number of things happened this week in relation to our troubled past and how it continues to bleed into the present.
The body of a teenager shot dead by undercover soldiers over 40 years ago was exhumed for examination in relation to a reopened police investigation.
The family of Daniel Rooney are understandably distressed; the grave he was buried in was a family plot with other family members including an infant laid to rest there.
One day after excavation of the plot began it was revealed that "an object of interest" was discovered with his remains. Given the trauma they've been through we can only hope the end justifies the means and the Rooney family finally get the justice they deserve.
In Derry the family of 15-year-old Manus Deery, shot dead in the Bogside in 1972 by a British soldier, finally received some justice when the MoD at last admitted the schoolboy did not pose a danger to the soldier who killed him.
The Wave Trauma Centre once again raised the issue of pensions for those injured and unable to work during the troubles. The organisation estimates around 500 people continue to live with life changing injuries.
At a time when questions are being asked about the methods used by the executive to buy peace by 'boxing off' paramilitary bosses the fact the pensions issue remains unresolved should shame those in power.
Secretary of State James Brokenshire, who doesn't appear to be that comfortable in his new role, has signalled the likelihood of a public consultation on the past which for many will just sound like more delays.
Political consensus would do away with the need for that delay. Should that not be what the coalition direct their new found mature relationship towards rather than defending throwing money at Dee Stitt, the self-styled 'big man' from Bangor?
