Dear Chris Heaton-Harris,
Apparently you recently told one of our elected representatives that he was “talking bo****ks”. While we normally expect to hear the Queen’s English from secretaries of state, your language more closely resembled that of the late Duke of Edinburgh. (Perhaps you should campaign for a Vulgar Language Act.)
Your choice of words is your own sad business, but the sentiments you expressed might reasonably be regarded as derogatory.
SDLP councillor Séamas de Faoite was respectfully explaining to you the widespread view here that your punitive budget is designed to force the DUP back to Stormont.
The expected response from a secretary of state would be to indicate that you understood and respected his opinion, but you disagreed with it. (Over here, that’s called good manners.)
You said recently that, like a good referee, you did not wish to draw attention to yourself. You have certainly failed on that one.
Even the pro-Conservative Spectator magazine (former editor Boris Johnson) recently asked if you were the worst NI secretary ever (apparently forgetting that Karen Bradley did not know unionists and nationalists voted for different parties).
Read more: What exactly is the Orange Order celebrating?
Read more:Never mind the poverty, wave your flag
Few here believe your claim that your heartless budget is not political in intent. So you will be glad to know that this column believes you.
Why wouldn’t it? You represent a political party personified by that fine paragon of virtue, Boris Johnson, a politician of decency, honesty and integrity. (Well, maybe not decency. Or honesty. Or integrity. But anyway.)
Twice he appointed you as minister of state and then elevated you to Chief Whip. So why would anyone doubt the motives of a loyal Johnson ally?
However, believing you raises another problem. If your budget is not designed to force the DUP into Stormont, what exactly is it aimed at? Is it some latter day Cromwellian crusade to punish the Irish?
Cromwell gave us a choice of to hell or Connacht. Is your choice to hell or Stormont? (It’s not much of a choice, as both appear designed to inflict eternal suffering.)
Or maybe it is a repeat of the British government’s reaction to the Irish famine. While recognising it as a natural disaster, John Mitchel pointed out that the famine offered Britain an opportunity to punish and even exterminate the Irish peasantry.
Stormont is a human disaster, so are you using it as an opportunity to punish us again?
You claim the budget is “to bring public finances under control” (presumably under your control) which suggests you cannot afford to fund basic public services. However, the banks are benefitting from high interest rates and low deposit rates. Lloyds Bank made a £2.2 billion profit in the first three months of this year (up 27 per cent).
Barclays and Nat West also made significant profit increases, but your government has cut the banking surcharge (a special tax on banks) from 8 per cent to 3 per cent. That’s not keeping public finances under control – that’s keeping the poor under control, by ending free school meals for deprived children during the holidays.
It will keep a whole people under control if our roads are not gritted and our street lights are off during the winter. It will keep the sick under control by failing to increase the health budget, which will mean longer waiting lists and it will keep NHS staff under control by denying them a wage increase. (That’s the same NHS staff which your friend Boris used to applaud.)
Your budget has been criticised and/or condemned by everyone here: party political leaders; the civil service head; trade unions; the retail sector; welfare groups; educationalists; children’s rights groups; the Royal College of Surgeons and even the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council.
Presumably you would argue that they are all wrong and you are right. Which would lead most reasonable people to conclude that you are the only one who, in your own words, is talking bo***cks.
