Pearse Doherty (Donegal South West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

The Minister is missing the point and perhaps he is doing so deliberately. This is not about cost benefit analysis. The cost benefit analysis carried out heretofore relates to whether it would be beneficial to the economy to do X, Y or Z. I refer, for example to whether it would be beneficial to cut off legacy property tax reliefs, reduce the rate of VAT and so forth. What we are seeking is equality proofing. The Minister referred to the ESRI but earlier he disputed certain findings made by that organisation. We are seeking that the Department should carry out an analysis of how the budget affects different categories. In other words, it should consider how budget 2013 affects women or those with disabilities. If we were to consider how the disabled have been affected, we could review what has been the impact on them of the measures relating to health, social protection and finance. The impact in respect of low-income thresholds and those whose mortgages are distressed could also be analysed.

A basket of indicators could be used in the context of the analysis to which I refer. I am not prescribing what should be those indicators or the groups which should be analysed. I am merely providing examples of the types of groups in respect of which analyses should be carried out. I am not stating that the position of every Mary and Sean should be analysed. Rather, I am of the view that the impact on particular groups which we all genuinely believe should be protected or which at least should not be adversely or unfairly affected by budgetary decisions should be analysed. I accept that all citizens may be obliged to tighten their belts but I would like an analysis to be carried out in respect of the groups of individuals to which I refer in order that it can be clearly shown that, for example, this year's budget did not adversely affect the disability sector. The analysis might actually show that the disability sector has benefited from the budget. It might also show that women have benefited or have lost out. That is what we are seeking, we are not concerned here with the economic impact.

As the Minister well knows, the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council will analyse budget 2013 in respect of its affect on the economy and its potential to reach the deficit reduction targets. The council will not consider the impact of the budget on, for example, the disability sector. Both the Minister and I know this and there is no point in pretending the council is going to do something different.

I referred to the North, which is not the only jurisdiction in which equality proofing is carried out. Equality proofing should be something of which we have no fear. I accept, from what he said, that the Minister is not going to accept the amendment. Without spending any money at all, will he not ask his officials to examine what has happened in other jurisdictions where equality proofing has been introduced? Will he ask them to discover what would be the impact and cost of introducing equality proofing here? Will he and his officials consider the concept - without making any commitment whatever to introducing it - in order to discover what is best practice and whether the increased transparency to which it would give rise increase transparency and empower those in opposition and in government to make better decisions in respect of budgetary processes in the future?

Gone are the days when Ministers for Finance could take to their feet to deliver their budgets and even their Cabinet colleagues would not know what they were going to announce. The budgetary position is improving, although there was much secrecy in respect of this year's budget. The Government stepped back a bit in this regard but hopefully the position will be different in the future. We need to be able to discuss positions in a proper and rational way before they become either policy or the subject of legislative provision. In addition, these positions must be both evidence and fact-based. Those of us in opposition rely on the Department of Finance and other Departments to provide the analysis we require. Equality-proofing would be a very important tool and would allow us to consider what options or proposals we might wish to put forward in future pre-budget submissions. I know the Minister will not accept the amendment but I ask him to indicate that he will consider the potential of the idea, what it would cost to implement, what constitutes best practice in other jurisdictions and whether it would be possible for the Department to engage in equality-proofing.