Sinn Féin proposals aim to ‘remove ever-present threat of collapse’ at Stormont

By Rebecca Black, Press Association

Sinn Féin has launched a series of proposed reforms aimed at “removing the ever-present threat of collapse” at Stormont.

The largest party in the Assembly is the latest to publish a reform document aimed at stabilising the institutions, which have experienced significant turbulence in recent years and effective collapses between 2017 and 2020 and 2022 to 2024.

Launching the proposals at Stormont on Monday, First Minister and Sinn Féin vice president Michelle O’Neill restated the party’s preference for a united Ireland, but said their Building Better Politics document was a bid to improve the operations of the current institutions.

The eight-page document includes proposals for reform designed to ensure the Assembly and Executive can continue to function during a political crisis, and prevent any single party being able to “block or collapse” the institutions.

While Sinn Féin is proposing that the largest nationalist party and the largest unionist party should retain the right to nominate the first minister and deputy first minister, if either chooses not to nominate, that opportunity would pass to other parties.

The party is also proposing the removal of the “veto” over the election of the Stormont speaker at the first meeting of a new assembly, ensuring no potential blockage for the Assembly starting its work.

In addition, there is a proposal to explore options to “introduce greater transparency and accountability in relation to decisions made by the speaker”.

Other proposals include devolving fiscal powers, equality for MLAs who are designated as “other”, instead of unionist or nationalist, and “normalising” the appointment of the justice minister.

The document comes after proposals for reform of the institutions previously published by the Alliance Party as well as the SDLP, which leads the official Opposition at Stormont.

O’Neill said the current set-up, working in a “forced coalition” with parties which had “very different politics”, made for a “challenging and difficult arrangement”.

“I think our unusual, and some might also say abnormal, political infrastructure are the necessary product of the peace process and therefore we are committed to being here, to working every day, to try to deliver for people despite all those challenges,” she said.

“But we do believe that we can make changes that improve how we do government, that we can do without undermining the core principles of the Good Friday Agreement.

“So today, this is about our contribution to the ongoing debate. It’s an important piece of work and we’re presenting our considered proposals on reform, that we believe will make a difference to the political institutions.”

She said: “Principally, we are proposing to remove the ever-present threat of collapse, because this is something that frequently is raised, because the greatest obstacle to delivery is when the institutions are prevented from operating themselves, so removing the veto of the largest parties over the operation of the Executive and Assembly is therefore the primary proposal we are advocating.”

O’Neill said other proposals in the document were aimed at improving transparency, accountability, democracy and delivery.

“We do recognise that these proposals alone will not resolve every challenge that we have, and the reason that I say that is that reform won’t overcome the reality that there are those who simply don’t want to share power,” she said, highlighting the DUP.

Meanwhile, DUP leader Gavin Robinson said he would read the proposals with interest, but that he wanted to see a reform of how parties engaged.

“One thing that needs to happen in this place is reforming of the heart and how people are willing to engage with each other, and whether they’re interested in making this place work or not,” he told media in the Great Hall at Stormont.

“The structures, the procedures, the institutions – that doesn’t matter, whatever they are, if someone is coming at it with the wrong approach, it isn’t going to work.”