Be careful what you wish for with direct rule

There is a bit of a buzz going around that it might be no bad thing if Stormont did collapse and we had a period of direct rule.

Politicians aren't saying it – that would constitute an abject admission of failure – but you hear it on the streets and there are hints of it at the Assembly.

Peter Robinson, for instance, told me that handing back powers over welfare to Westminster was one solution to the present impasse. Sinn Fein's Gerry Adams and Paul Maskey have talked of letting an election be held on the welfare reform issue if it came to that.

Without agreement between the parties on a way forward an Executive couldn't be formed, so that would also probably amount to letting Westminster run the place.

The argument you hear outside the elected representatives is that London could do the heavy lifting on difficult decisions necessary to balance the books, perhaps even deal with legacy issues for us, and then get Stormont back up and running.

It wouldn't be that easy. First of all, direct rule ministers, especially the Tories, are likely to make deep cuts. We got a hint from Theresa Villiers in a recent speech, where she talked of savings to be made from making civil servants redundant.

The Tories are committed to reducing benefits still further, and even Labour would lop £1 a week off child benefit.

Britain tackled the deficit by introducing water and prescription charges, pushing up local government taxes (while Stormont suppressed them) and cutting up to 50% from local authority budgets. Student fees are also nearly three times our local level.

Such hard choices will have to be faced up to anyway; even with a devolved administration we can't just keep asking for more money to subsidise services which exceed UK levels in many cases.

Yet it is preferable to have our own politicians tailoring our tax and spend in the best way possible to meet our needs. Direct rule would have no real constraints.

The collapse of Stormont would also be a terrible blow to public and international confidence in the peace process, and it might not be easy – or quick – to restore it.

So, if you think direct rule wouldn't be such a bad thing, be careful what you wish for.

What we need to do with decision-making at Stormont is reform and streamline it – not abolish it altogether.

Belfast Telegraph