Our Secretary of State came to Belfast last week to reflect on the first anniversary of the restoration of devolution.
Hilary Benn’s message was nothing if not direct, speaking about the appalling state of our public services, particularly health care.
He blamed the ducking of significant reforms, arguing that “the decisions necessary for systemic and not piecemeal reform to the health and social care system in Northern Ireland simply haven’t been taken”.
What was remarkable about the speech was not so much its content but the response to it.
The line that the Executive needs to get its financial house in order is not a new one for a Secretary of State to deliver. We have heard it many times before.
Yet the response locally moved from one extreme of people arguing he was spot on in his critique to that he was out of order and out of touch.
However, I wonder if everyone in this debate is not entirely missing a few central points.
I have heard the British government and the Northern Ireland Executive use this amazing word called “reform” as if it were some silver bullet to resolve our problems.
In the same way Rachel Reeves leans on the word “growth” to boost the ailing UK economy, reform is becoming the political equivalent of the Loch Ness monster. All of us have heard about it, but nobody has actually seen it.
Reform is becoming the political equivalent of the Loch Ness monster. All of us have heard about it, but nobody has actually seen it
Whether it is health care, education, or any other public service in between, we often hear about the need for reform, but little detail on what that reform looks like in practice.
There needs to be a push to move the conversation beyond simply talking about reform in the abstract to reform in practice.
What does a reformed health service look like in Northern Ireland, and what are the steps to get there? What does reform of how Stormont spends money look like, and why will it be better?
All of these questions and many others need answers.
Over the past week, there has been a comment that the Executive simply cannot handle these big-ticket reforms, and essentially we will never achieve anything meaningful with our current system of government.
But the simple reality is that without Stormont, we will get nothing regarding reform.
The other message from the Benn speech was that the challenge of fixing public services will have to be met by the Executive rather than Westminster.
For those who long for direct rule, it is worth reminding ourselves that detailed ideas to reform public services here have been just as scarce when we have had direct rule ministers in post as they have been with our own local ministers.
This is the governmental quagmire we so often face here. We have a British government that, when it could have reformed, didn’t, and an Executive that seems incapable of making really difficult decisions.
Our MLAs have another option. They could see the Benn speech as an opportunity rather than a threat.
This is their opportunity to prove the naysayers and doubters wrong that devolution cannot grapple with the big challenges facing Northern Ireland.
If the first anniversary of this iteration of the return of power-sharing has shown anything, it is that positive mood music will only take you so far.
There is a desire for better out there beyond a positive relationship between Michelle O’Neill and Emma Little-Pengelly.
As a new year of devolution begins, let’s not make it to February 2026 having the same debates about the need for “reform”.
Let’s debate the real and substantive reform proposals that are on the table and set to be implemented.
Benn was right to highlight the challenges facing Northern Ireland but wrong in not acknowledging that some of the failures of reform rest with past British governments alongside previous Northern Ireland Executives.
This speech might not have had any new messages from London that we haven’t heard before.
Still, it should be seized as an opportunity to show devolution sceptics that reform is possible driven by local ministers.