Foster’s case does not make even basic sense

Arlene Foster is currently speaking to her DUP colleagues, including the Speaker, in the Assembly chamber.

There is an immediate problem with what she is saying.

Firstly, she says it would have been “inappropriate” for Northern Ireland simply to copy the Great Britain scheme.

Secondly, she says she regrets the “error” of not including cost controls.

Here is the problem: not including cost controls was the only meaningful difference between the schemes!

So those points simply cannot both be right.

Everything else she says (notably about the one DUP MLA in the chamber) is a soap opera diversion. On her own terms, her own case does not add up. That is the focus now.


3 thoughts on “Foster’s case does not make even basic sense

  1. William Allen says:

    As I am sure you have noticed, I am not a fan of the devolved regional governments because they greatly increase the likelihood of the failure of the UK, but if anything shows how bad an idea these ‘governments’ are it is this farce. Foster’s only excuse is that she was not kept informed of all the details by her officials. However as the Minister in charge of the department at the time the scheme was set up she should (and if she was a Westminster minister would) take responsibility and step down. This should be the case even if nothing ex-minister Bell has claimed about SPAD interference in the shutting down of the scheme is true.

    The behavior of all the political parties in Northern Ireland is such that none of them are competent to govern. This is because no matter what they do they are virtually guaranteed to be re-elected on tribal lines. In situations like this no matter how many elections you hold you do not have true functional democracy. Her Majesty the Queen has the power to sack a Prime Minister, surely she or someone in the National government should have the authority to sack Foster?

    • 1729torus says:

      Direct Rule means that London would make considerable concessions to CNR sentiment to keep the peace, they would generally err on the side of generousity for fear of the IRA, and because they’re embarrassed by the UK’s history in Ireland. HM’s Government would often solicit advice from Dublin in the use of its powers over NI as well.

      They wouldn’t make any particlular effort to sell the Union to CNR people either and would misgivern NI somewhat. Both of which would make a United Ireland more likely in the long run,

      Salami tactics at best, joint rule at worst. All over the heads of NI’s Unionist population whilst the demographic clock is ticking away.

  2. other paul says:

    I think it’s completely unacceptable that some people try to play this RHI scandal down as being a tiny fraction of the block grant that money applied correctly could’ve transformed thousands and thousands of lives. But at the same time I think we’re all surprised by how this has exposed so many other fault lines, SPAD’s, the speaker of the house, the integrity and competence of Arlene Foster (and scarily the civil service).
    The DUP has behaved absolutely disgracefully (what’s new?) and they’ve clearly learned lessons from Trump: throw mud, accuse the “MSM” of fake news, doubling down on a losing hand. Sometimes I don’t know whether to be disgusted or impressed.
    I don’t think that a re-election will help (I don’t think anyone would expect the assembly to change much), but we have to question why we’re wasting money on this charade. Perhaps it’s better to return to direct rule…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: