Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour) | Oireachtas source

No. As the Deputy rightly says, the Dáil is gaining. I do not see how it could lose anything. Oversight as it was done over the last 20 years was not particularly strong. As Deputy Fleming has repeatedly and strongly made the case, it was post-fact consideration of expenditure. The money was spent. The construction of a budget each year was entirely an Executive function. One might say that is still largely the case, but I would like it not to be. In less challenging times, when we have money to spend in an expansive way, it will be easier for Opposition Members to engage in the budgetary process. I recognise that it is difficult for Members of the Opposition to table budgetary cuts and to express a preference for one cut over another. The whole idea of a multi-annual framework and comprehensive view of expenditure so that most options - not necessarily all - are on the table. That would facilitate engagement with line Departments in the committee system and explore the options. For example, in the area of social protection, a committee could consider the sum of money spent on child benefit and ask, realisitically, if the correct approach is being taken. Should there be a different balance and should the money be spent on service rather than provided directly? The money we spend on the elderly could be considered. In the context of the debate we have just had, there is an enormous quantum of money spent on the disabilities sector if one looks at departmental expenditure. The Department of Education and Skills spends €1.3 billion on special education. Approximately €1.5 billion is spent on disabilities by the Department of Health. Approximately €3 billion is spent on disabilities by the Department of Social Protection. If one looks at the Department of Transport and others, an enormous quantum of money is spent. In a structured Parliament, we should be asking if that is the best way to support our citizens with disabilities. I hope the budgetary and committee process would, on a whole-year basis, get its teeth into that. It would not be about asking if someone spent the money they were supposed to in the proper way but about outcomes and appropriate approaches. It would break down the silo attitude of Departments. If money is transferred from one Department to another to better effect, it should be welcomed.