Chris Hazzard MP: Stormont Executive needs investment, not an allowance

Writing for Belfast Live, South Down MP Chris Hazzard argues that Stormont is being asked to manage decline while an insulated Whitehall watches from the sidelines.

Earlier this month, the British Secretary of State Hilary Benn arrived in Kilkeel Harbour to meet a fishing industry in crisis. He heard of soaring fuel costs and a crewing shortage that threatens to dry‑dock a generational way of life. While he acknowledged their difficulties, his message remained fixed to a familiar Treasury script: the Stormont Executive has received a “record settlement,” and it is now up to local ministers to manage it. To repeat this line to people watching their livelihoods slip away is to expose a profound disconnect between Whitehall mathematics and the reality on the ground. It is a fiscal illusion that depends on the public not looking past the headline figure to see a British Treasury-controlled system being slowly strangled by real‑terms cuts, a decaying spending baseline, and a decade‑long refusal to invest in the basic infrastructure of a modern state.

The Treasury’s preferred trick is to speak only in cash terms. An £18.2 billion block grant sounds like a windfall until inflation is accounted for. The NI Fiscal Council has shown that while the settlement is 2.6 per cent larger in cash, it amounts to just 0.2 per cent growth in real terms. And even that microscopic increase is fragile. If the Executive is required to repay previous overspends, the budget would actually shrink by 3 per cent in real terms. The deeper problem lies in the benchmark used to judge “fairness.” Funding here is tied to public spending in England through the Barnett Formula, and the Treasury insists that because Stormont receives 124 per cent of English spending, it is somehow overfunded. But that logic only holds if spending levels in England are themselves adequate. They are not. Across the water, the English baseline for public services is in a state of managed decline. That is a direct result of political choices. The British government has chosen military spending and weapons of war over the health and well-being of their own people. As a result, NHS England is grappling with a £13.8 billion maintenance backlog, while schools face a further £13 billion in essential repairs. Only last month, the Annual Local Authority Road Maintenance survey revealed that local roads in England are now resurfaced just once every 97 years. Britain sits at the bottom of the G7 for total investment, and even the quality of its bathing waters – rated five times worse than the European average – reflects decades of capital neglect that have earned it the label of “the dirty man of Europe.” This decay is no longer an abstract policy debate; it is a live political crisis. It is one reason why parties such as the SNP, Plaid Cymru and the Greens are tipped for major breakthroughs in next month’s elections. Voters across the water are on the verge of revolting against a system that prioritises fiscal optics over functional infrastructure. When the British Government tells Belfast to “live within its means,” it is benchmarking local services against an English system that is itself on starvation rations. Brexit has only sharpened the squeeze. Imposed without a mandate in the north, it has stripped away EU structural funds that once underpinned community development and peace‑building initiatives. Replacement schemes designed in Whitehall have failed to match either the scale or the certainty of what was lost. Fishing and coastal communities in Co Down who once received 10 per cent of Britian’s share of Europe’s Maritime & Fisheries Fund, are now to receive less than 3 per cent of Westminster’s new replacement scheme. The British Government has placed a ceiling on economic growth while simultaneously tightening the purse strings. Perhaps the most frustrating aspect of this fiscal theatre is the role played by some within the local media and political establishment. Rather than scrutinising the systemic underfunding that is choking public services, a chorus of voices – including the Leader of the Opposition at Stormont – merely echoes the Treasury’s “record funding” line. Indeed, for a Leader of the Opposition who previously served as a Downing Street press officer, it often feels as though old habits die hard. Acting as a regional megaphone for Westminster talking points does not inform the public; it validates a false narrative of local incompetence and shields the British Government from accountability. Meanwhile, the Northern Ireland Office continues to urge MLAs to make “tough decisions” – a euphemism for cuts or imposing charges. This framing ignores a basic constitutional reality: local representatives are not accountants. They are elected with a duty of care to protect the health and wellbeing of their citizens. MLAs are right to resist decisions that would lengthen waiting lists, introduce water charges, increase tuition fees or strip support from vulnerable children simply to satisfy a Treasury spreadsheet. Closing a facility without the capital to provide a better alternative is not leadership. It is a dereliction of duty. Stormont is being asked to manage decline while an insulated Whitehall watches from the sidelines. As Britain continues its retreat from public investment, it is clear that more people in the north of Ireland are looking south. The Shared Island Fund has already stepped in to support projects the Treasury has neglected – from the Narrow Water Bridge to cross‑border environmental and educational schemes. This is not just tactical financial support; it reflects a growing recognition that the current fiscal framework is fundamentally broken. On an island where one jurisdiction is navigating multi‑billion‑euro surpluses while the other is lectured on “tough decisions” by a neighbour in visible decline, it is no surprise that the economic argument for constitutional change is increasingly being framed as a matter of basic survival. The “record settlement” narrative may be a masterpiece of political framing, but it fails the test of economic honesty. It ignores the soaring costs of modern governance, the inadequacy of the Treasury’s spending baseline, the fallout of Brexit, and the British state’s chronic refusal to invest in the future. Whether it is fishermen in Kilkeel or families waiting for life-changing surgery, people deserve a conversation based on need, not on misleading historical comparisons. It is time to stop talking about “record settlements” and start talking about the actual cost of a functioning society. One is a headline; the other is a necessity.

For all the latest news, visit the Belfast Live homepage here and sign up to our daily newsletter here.