David Cullinane (Waterford, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the witnesses. Mr. Bond made the point that there is a commitment in the programme for Government to improve input into policy procedures regarding the formation of budgets. This comes from an OECD report which critiqued the State's previous approaches to budget making. We all agree that in the past, much scrutiny was carried out by Opposition spokespersons almost immediately after the relevant Minister or Ministers presented the budget. The first sight those spokespersons would have of the budget was when it was presented and they had no indication of any of the measures it contained beforehand. Often, the analysis of whether a measure is progressive or regressive comes from the ESRI or think tanks after the budget has been introduced. If we can move away from this to a position where we would have more input before the budget is brought forward, that would be a welcome development.

Dr. Murphy stated that the Departments should carry out the proofing. While I have no difficulty with this, we must ensure we get the proofing tools right first and foremost. This is crucial. I am interested in international best practice in the area and in what works well. At its first meeting, the committee discussed equality, gender, poverty and rural proofing. Some of the media commentary was negative and asked what all this proofing means. Could the witnesses spell out the importance of it in the context of equality budgeting? We must give it that importance first. What tools would be best for the Departments to use? Which body should oversee it to ensure that the tools are working effectively and that we are analysing and scrutinising proposals from both the Opposition and the Government? Are we good at this and how do we measure up against other countries?