There was good news and bad news yesterday for the
Committee for the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Min..., who were
discussing the accelerated passage of the Financial Assistance Bill with Junior Ministers Jeffrey Donaldson and Gerry Kelly.
The bad news was that the Executive currently does not have the necessary authority to make an effective financial response to a crisis and could, according to Jeffrey Donaldson, be “sharper” when it comes to dealing with poverty. This is why the new Bill needs to be rushed through the Assembly – without it, the Executive is unable to make the supplementary fuel poverty payments promised last month by Nigel Dodds. Worst of all, the gap in Executive powers has been recognised for some time, but remedying the situation was delayed by the Executive’s failure to meet.
The good news was that not only will the new Bill allow the Executive to act more efficiently to protect people from hardship in the event of a crisis, but they will be better able to deal effectively with unacceptable levels of poverty – such as those revealed by the
Save the Children report on child poverty last year.
So, we can rest assured that next time, at least, the Executive will be ready for action.
I've written recently to Dodds seeking clarification, as I understanfd the original Richie proposal indicated the provision of energy credits - see extract below:
Payment as a credit ensures that the award is targeted at the intended outcome – energy purchase and not as is often the case with WFA frequently used for other purposes. But in arguing the case at the Taskforce I stressed the point that by developing a new approach it gave officials the opportunity to broker with energy suppliers a bulk purchase discount based on the £15m purchase of an energy credit for vulnerable consumers. I had hoped that the payment would be flexible, in that it could be directed to the form of energy used to actually heat the home (Oil, Gas, etc) but accepted given the time constraints that electricity may be the most realistic option, as it is used by all consumers, although less frequently as the heating source.
I know this is difficult but the principle is one well worth establishing, as it provides taxpayer benefit and value for money. However, I have asked for clarity from officials on whether or not the award will be made as a credit, as there was ambiguity in the initial announcement but as yet have had no confirmation. The real danger is the longer the uncertainty goes on the more likely the easier option to pay as an increase in benefit payment will be adopted
Another opportunity lost I suspect.