Sam McBride: NIO’s Queen portrait shambles hints at a far profounder problem

The caller told me that an NIO civil servant had been paid £10,000 because in the course of their duties they had to walk past portraits of the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh – and that as part of the settlement, the images had been removed from display in the NIO’s Belfast headquarters.

Although sceptical that this could be true, I was influenced by the identity of the individual who had phoned me. They were known to me and were not in the habit of passing on lurid rumours so I submitted a Freedom of Information (FoI) request to the NIO.

The request met with a curious response. Having asked for material about the decision to remove the Queen and Prince Philip’s portraits, the NIO did not deny that it had done so. However, it claimed that it could not release the information because “it would, or would be likely to endanger the physical or mental health or the safety of [an] individual”.

Working on a book about RHI, I forgot about the response. But I have now been told by a well-placed source that the FoI request caused “panic” at the top of the NIO because it believed that the decision to remove the portraits had been restricted to a tiny group of people and would not leak.

Three weeks ago, Lord Maginnis entered the frame. He set out in the House of Lords what he said had happened, going into more detail than I had been told in January.

This week a source said that some in the NIO believed that I had passed on the details to him so that he could use parliamentary privilege to reveal the story, thus allowing it to be reported. That was not the case. However, because of what had happened in January, when I heard the former UUP MP speaking about the issue, I listened intently.

We reported how he told Parliament that a senior NIO official had been paid £10,000 because of the situation. The NIO declined to comment on the accuracy of what he said, describing it as a “personnel matter”.

UUP peer Lord Rogan asked written questions which last week were answered by NIO minister Lord Duncan in a way which clarified that now all images of the Queen – not just the large portraits – were banned from the walls of Stormont House.

When on Monday morning the News Letter asked the NIO: “As the new secretary of state, does Julian Smith stand over the decision to ban images of the Queen from NIO property, despite her being the head of state of the government in which he is a minister?”

The department took until Tuesday night to respond with the bland answer: “The government takes its obligation under fair employment legislation very seriously. We will not comment on individual personnel matters, nor will we comment on the specific comments made by Lord Rogan.”

After the News Letter reported the ban on the Queen’s photo, the NIO said nothing as the story led the Nolan Show, was covered by the Frank Mitchell Show, the Belfast Telegraph and others.

Then on Wednesday night Mr Smith released a statement which implied that the story was wrong because he said he had a photo of the Queen in his private office in Stormont House.

But when asked when that photo was placed there, Mr Smith’s spokesman was unable to do so. As of last night, the NIO remained unable to answer that question – even after Mr Smith had launched a review of the whole episode.

The NIO’s handling of what at one level is a trivial situation – albeit one involving huge symbolism and allegedly a significant sum of public money – has been shambolic.

Even setting aside the original decisions, this week alone the NIO’s bungling attempts to spin the truth have transformed one awkward story into at least a week-long series.

Having offended unionists with the removal of the portraits, Mr Smith’s tweeted photo of a miniature image of the Queen on his mantelpiece, accompanied by a gushing comment about how “proud” the small photo made him feel, then unsettled some nationalists.

The inability to get its own story straight – even between its own ministers – over what decorates its walls has been remarkable.

Former NIO officials have been looking on in dismay at what the once-powerful department – hollowed out under devolution – has become.

As the department currently overseeing talks aimed at restoring devolution and advising the prime minister about some of the most complex and controversial elements of Brexit, this shambles hints at profound problems within the department with which Julian Smith has been encharged.