Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank Professor O'Hagan for her attendance. A number of years ago, I had a chance to travel to Glasgow and look at some of the work being done by EBAG, and others. It has been a really important initiative. The example she gave was really useful. One of the issues we are looking at in the committee is the different kinds of families and how they are treated. It captures that question of the need for equality budgeting to be wider and not simply to look at a narrow income distribution aspect. We need to apply that analysis within the social protection system. For example, one of the issues that comes up is the question around individualised social protection and looking at the impact on the different individuals in a household rather than just a general household indication. The reference to the impact on women from ethnic minority groups within the lone parent category is a clear example of that.

I want to pick up on something Dr. O'Hagan mentioned about tax, which is interesting. Even in the past few years, that has become more of an area of analysis. I am aware that in Scotland, where there is the question around which powers sit with the Scottish Government and so forth, there has been a journey toward looking at gender and equality budgeting in certain areas. Increasingly, there is now a focus on how we bring that analysis into areas such as taxation and revenue. When it comes to equality budgeting and delivering on public duties on equality, it seems to me there is sometimes a notion that we have to add a bit on to cover it. The idea is that we will spend X amount on equality or we will have one group dealing with it, rather than looking at the main policies with the very large sums attached to them. Does Professor O'Hagan agree there is an issue in this regard? In the case of some of our tax relief systems and other policies that are embedded, we need to look at some of the assumptions or inequalities embedded in them, rather than just saying we will give a €1 million fund to such-and-such group to help bring it on board. It is about challenging some of the solid provisions that tend always to be in annual budgets and tend not to get queried at all. Taxation is one of those areas that has come up for discussion here. Social protection is another, to which Professor O'Hagan referred.

A development that has been really powerful in Scotland is the idea that the equality statement comes out alongside the budget. It is not a case of deliver a budget and then, four or five months later, somebody does an analysis of what its effects might be. The equality consideration is there in the statement on the day. That is really important. We are now at a point where carbon budgets need to be talked about as well. It is important that when we metric these things, they are not simply interesting academic exercises but are visible alongside the budgetary decisions. That is on the way in respect of the carbon emissions and environmental impacts of budgetary decisions. The same should apply in respect of equality impacts. It is important that they be visible on budget day and it should be clear they have been thought about in advance. Professor O'Hagan mentioned the sustainable development goals, which may be a way of bringing these different aspects together.

Will she comment on the piloting phenomenon? We have seen one pilot after another. We fought so hard to get gender and equality proofing included in the budgeting process in Ireland and it was beginning to be piloted across two Departments. Now we are looking at wellness budgets and wellness indictors. All of that is good but I am concerned that we might end up with pilot after pilot. We know from the evidence all around the world that equality budgeting makes a difference. Will she comment on the danger of siloing in respect of piloting? The idea that we can do budgets differently may get reframed and there is a danger of going back to the starting point time after time.

Professor O'Hagan mentioned local authorities. The citizens of this country have called for local authorities to have a goal in regard to gender equality. This area may need to be strengthened. I understand there were situations in the UK where local authorities failed to apply a gender analysis and that ended up costing them a lot more in the long run. Does she agree that spending on equality is a form of preventative spending?