Dr. Fiona Dukelow:

The Leas-Chathaoirleach has identified a really important area of debate that needs more attention. In addition to the debate on UBI and participation income, there is a debate on UBI by comparison with UBF. It seems to be happening more in the UK than here. Professor Mary Murphy, who has been before this committee, has done some interesting work on sustainable welfare. She has had an expert on universal basic services over, Ms Anna Coote, who has done considerable research on this in the UK context. Much work has been progressed on what would constitute universal basic services and how we would expand the welfare state around them. From her point of view and that of many others, universal basic services offers a far superior system of support than universal basic income. To make it universal, it would have to be quite low. It is really expensive to pay for and, as has been said, it is open to different interpretations and models. If it is quite minimal and there are no services, people are left in very vulnerable circumstances. We need to think about what universal basic services are in the 21st century. There are really interesting debates on eco-social policy and sustainable welfare in that sense. If we have more universal basic services, does it mean private consumption is dampened, especially in areas like healthcare?

There are also really interesting ideas concerning the right to repair, with which the committee is probably very familiar. This would reduce the consumption economy. These are very necessary shifts. The Chair talked about a big moment in the future. We have not talked about the climate crisis but that is something to which each Department and Government will be responding increasingly in its policy area.