48 Britain The EconomistJanuary 27th 20182 higher taxes. This week Boris Johnson, the
foreign secretary, took a break from his day
job to demand that the NHS receive an ex-
tra £100m per week. When it came to the
matter of how to pay for it, Mr Johnson fell
back on the idea of a “Brexit dividend”, an
optimistic notion given that Brexit is ex-
pected to cost the exchequer money.
But some in his party are thinking seri-
ously about how more revenue could be
squeezed out of voters. Last year the Tories’
election manifesto promised to make as-
set-rich pensioners pay more towards the
cost oftheir care in laterlife, by including
the value of their homes in assessments of
their means. The policy’s poor design
meant that it was rightly criticised as a “de-
mentia tax” on those unlucky enough to
run up large bills for social care; it was hast-
ily dropped. Yet many Tories remain open
to tapping the wealthy. “There is a critical
mass that tax on wealth will have to hap-
pen at some point, as the system is unsus-
tainable. Itis something the prime minister
is cautiously interested in,” says Chris Wil-kins, who was head of strategy in Down-
ing Street until lastsummer.
Others, such as Nicholas Boles, a for-
mer Tory minister, have suggested raising
NICs, arguing that the idea might win pub-
lic support if it were made clear that the
revenue went to the NHS. Various techno-
crats, including Nick Macpherson, a former
permanent secretary at the Treasury, have
given cautious backing to something akin
to a hypothecated tax for the NHS, an idea
normally unpopular with economists.
Tax reform is unlikely during this parlia-
ment. The legislative calendar is crowded
by Brexit and the government has only a
slim majority. Slowly, however, political
tectonicplates are moving. The prime min-
ister is under increasing attack for her ti-
midity. Polls show that half of voters think
taxes should rise, the highest proportion
since 2004. Ifthe public want to maintain
current levels of public services, they must
pay. Eventually the government, and the
opposition, will have to take their lead
from Healey and admit it. 7T
HIS year will mark two decades since
the Good Friday Agreement brought an
end to years of sectarian conflict in North-
ern Ireland. But as the region’s politicians
gathered for talks on January 24th, a grim-
mer anniversary was on their minds. As of
this week the Stormont Assembly, set up
under the Good Friday deal, has been sus-
pended for a year, following an almighty
falling out between republican and union-
ist parties. The latest round of discussions
designed to get it back up and running does
not look promising.
Senior members of the clergy painted a
bleak picture in their new-year messages.
Ken Good, the Protestant bishop of Derry
and Raphoe, lamented that Northern Ire-
land “has felt more divided than for a gen-
eration.” Eamon Martin, the Catholic arch-
bishop ofArmagh, said: “We seem to have
gone into a kind of vacuum at the moment,
with very little sense of direction.”
Last January, Assembly proceedings
shuddered to a halt when the late Martin
McGuinness, Sinn Fein’s leader in the
north, resigned asdeputy first minister.
McGuinness cited the “shameful disre-
spect” shown to his fellow republicans by
the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), Sinn
Fein’s partner in government. Under the
Assembly’s power-sharing rules, Sinn
Fein’s withdrawal caused an automaticsuspension of the devolved government.
Since then the British government has
hosted rounds of fruitless talks between
the two parties, covering issuesranging
from the rights of speakers of the Irish lan-
guage to the investigation of alleged pastabuses by the security services. The atmo-
sphere was summed up by Naomi Long,
the leader of the centrist Alliance Party,
when she declared: “There is zero trust.”
That is partly because the negotiations
have been punctuated by bouts of elector-
al combat. Elections to the suspended As-
sembly last March produced a surge in sup-
port for Sinn Fein. The general election in
June saw the DUPrecover, increasing its
tally ofMPs to ten. This proved crucial
when Theresa May fell short of a majority
and persuaded the DUPto prop up her gov-
ernment, in return for £1bn ($1.4bn) in new
funding for the province. Republicans be-
lieve that the British government’s depen-
dence on the DUPhas undermined its role
as an impartial broker in the talks.
The other aggravating factor is Brexit.
Most republicans oppose it, since it would
weaken ties with the Republic ofIreland.
Mostunionists support it, for exactly the
same reason.
The latest round of talks features two
new figures. Karen Bradley, whom Mrs
May appointed Northern Ireland secretary
earlier this month, was previously the cul-
ture secretary and has no previous experi-
ence of the province. Meanwhile Sinn Fein
will soon be led by Mary Lou McDonald,
who will take over from Gerry Adams. Re-
publicans hope that Ms McDonald, who
has no past connection to the Irish Repub-
lican Army (IRA), will attract a new gener-
ation of voters to the party.
That ambition, and the chances of suc-
cess for the talks, have been dented by the
antics of Barry McElduff, a Sinn Fein MP.
On January 5th, the anniversary of a mas-
sacre in 1976 of ten Protestant civilians by
the IRA near the village of Kingsmill, Mr
McElduff posted a video of himself larking
about in a supermarket with a loaf of
Kingsmill bread on his head. He was even-
tually forced to resign. Sinn Fein should
have no problem winning the forthcoming
by-election for his seat, but his behaviour
has made a mockery of republican com-
plaints about the DUP’s “disrespect” for its
opponents. The contest will be bitter.
What if the talks go nowhere? With the
Assembly suspended, Northern Ireland is
already being governed mainly from West-
minster. In the absence of a deal between
Sinn Fein and the DUP, the province could
revert to “direct rule” by the British. In prac-
tice that might not look very different. But
the breakdown of a key part of the Good
Friday Agreement is a cause for deep con-
cern. The accord has formed the basis for
Northern Ireland’s prosperity and security.
During the 1990s around 550 people were
killed as a result of sectarian violence. In
the past decade, fewer than 30 have been.
Few believe that the end of devolution
could result in a return to previous levels of
violence. But the longer Northern Ireland’s
politicians play for time, the greater the
risks they take with the hard-won peace. 7Northern Ireland’s shutdownA little more conversation
BELFAST
But probably no more action, as the province notches up a year in political limboSinn Fein’s leaders, in no hurry
РЕЛИЗ
ГРУППЫ"What'sNews"