Code on Stormont special advisors does not go far enough

It was a scandal right at the heart of Stormont – linked to the bungled RHI scheme – which brought down the Assembly three years ago, and we are still awaiting the report from Sir Patrick Coghlin on the matter.

Inextricably linked to the RHI scandal was the role of special advisors, or Spads, and it’s no coincidence that one of the first acts of the new Executive was yesterday to publish an updated code for special advisors.

One of the key questions is, of course, whether or not the new code goes far enough and the answer is that it does not.

Firstly, while Spads will have a reduction in the maximum salary they can receive, the sums will still be eye-watering as far as many ordinary people are concerned. The updated code includes an £85,000 cap on the maximum salary a Spad can be paid, but this represents a fairly miserly reduction from the previous high of £91,809.

The concerns over salary have already been articulated by Traditional Unionist Voice leader Jim Allister, a politician who has too often been a lone voice on the issue of Spads, their salaries and their lack of accountability.

As he revealed last week, Mr Allister has proposed a bill on Spads, which includes a lower recommended cap on salary and a sensible cut in their number in the Executive Office from eight to four.

Mr Allister said he agreed with much of the Code of Conduct, but rightly, he once again pointed out that to be given true bite, the code should be complemented by legislation.

In addition, the Spads appointment process remains deeply unsatisfactory. For instance there is no requirement for the appointing minister to consider a widely based pool of candidates. Mr Allister is right, there is a remains a “party hack culture” regarding Spad appointments.