It is believed another legal “call-in” on the matter is likely
Stock image of Belfast City Hall(Image: Belfast Live)
Sinn Féin has failed to block a proposal to sign the Armed Forces Covenant in Belfast, in an attempt to stop a DUP motion through obscure council committee processes.
The Armed Forces Covenant saga at Belfast City Council was thought to have come to an end last June, when a DUP proposal fell on a knife edge vote, after spending months bouncing between committee and full council meetings, with a legal call-in added to the proceedings for good measure.
But the proposal, which would sign Belfast City up to a scheme that gives special privileges to past and present members of the British Army, reared its head again this year and was passed at the council’s March meeting of its Standards and Business Committee, with DUP, TUV and Alliance votes.
READ MORE: HMO: The three letters splitting opinions across Belfast
READ MORE: NI council’s £30,000 spend on sponsoring conferences called into question
The successful DUP Armed Forces motion states: “This council recognises the unique contribution that armed forces service leavers have and continue to make to our society. It agrees that veterans and serving personnel should not face any disadvantage as a result of their military service, and resolves that it will sign up immediately to the Armed Forces Covenant.”
In March the Armed Forces Covenant proposal passed at the Standards and Business Committee with 10 votes from the DUP, Alliance, and the TUV to eight against from Sinn Féin and the SDLP, with the Green Party abstaining.
The decision did not have to be “ratified,” meaning it did not have to go to the next full meeting of the council for final approval – where it has fallen before against the combined force of Sinn Féin, the SDLP, People Before Profit and an abstaining Green Party.
SDLP Councillor Séamas de Faoite said at that meeting: “I think it is ridiculous to use this committee to try and force through a policy that has been voted down before at full council, and use the makeup of the committee in one particular year to try and enforce something that some of us have said very clearly we have issues with.
“This is an undemocratic and underhand way to get a policy agreed.”
At the Standards and Business Committee meeting this week, Sinn Féin attempted to rescind the March decision, in a request with 18 councillor signatures, stating as there were resource implications, it should have gone to the Strategic Policy and Resources Committee, and then referred to the full council on “strategic” grounds.
DUP Alderman James Lawlor, who forwarded the Covenant proposal, forwarded an amendment to reject the rescinding motion. The amendment was questioned by Sinn Féin and the SDLP but was deemed competent by council officers.
Alderman Lawlor’s amendment passed with 10 votes in favour from the DUP, Alliance and the TUV, and nine against from Sinn Féin and the SDLP, with one abstention from the Green Party committee chair, Councillor Anthony Flynn.
The Standards and Business Committee was created at City Hall in April 2021, pushed through on Sinn Féin and DUP votes, and designed to fast-track or dismiss motions without ratification from the full council. It was described by People Before Profit as an attempt “to shut the voices of smaller parties,” and was looked upon with suspicion by Alliance, the SDLP and the Green Party. The smaller parties are now arguing that the committee has become a monster turning on its creators.
As it stands now the latest DUP motion has passed, but it will be subject to another call-in, which is considered likely. According to local government law, only 15 percent of a council is required to call-in a decision, setting off independent legal examination, a potential an equality impact assessment, then a redetermination of the decision.
If the call-in is seen as competent, it will go back to the full council, where the original proposal might then have to pass anything up to an 80 percent threshold of the vote to be successful.
The 15 percent may ask for a decision to be called-in on two grounds: firstly, that the decision was not arrived at after a proper consideration of the relevant facts and issues; ie, procedural grounds; and/or secondly that the decision would disproportionately affect adversely any section of the inhabitants of the district, ie community impact grounds.
The Armed Forces Covenant sets out two principles – firstly that those who serve in the armed forces, whether regular or reserve, and those who have served in the past as well as their families, should face “no disadvantage” compared to other citizens in the provision of public and commercial services. The second principle is that “special consideration” is appropriate in some cases, especially for those who have been injured and bereaved.
The intention of the covenant specifically relates to issues around housing, education and healthcare. The Armed Forces Act 2006 is a UK wide Act which imposes a statutory duty upon specified bodies to have “due regard” to principles of the covenant.
Examples of the Covenant in action are veterans with urgent housing needs being given “additional preference,” or high priority for social housing. Extra funding of £300 per child/year is provided for state schools in England to support service children.
For all the latest news, visit the Belfast Live homepage here and sign up to our daily newsletter here.
