Michael Noonan (Limerick City, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Pearse Doherty for tabling this amendment. In the debate on Committee Stage, I indicated that a substantial amount of analysis governing some of the groups the Deputy mentioned has been already published by the Department of Finance, or is due to be published in the coming months by Departments and other organisations. As such, I will avoid covering this ground again.

The Deputy noted the wide-ranging impacts of budgetary measures on social groups and difficulties in aggregating these disparate impacts on particular social groups. From my Department's perspective, a significant proportion of policy measures is covered by the SWITCH model. I am informed that the ESRI has been recently investigating how the model could be expanded to include other areas of policy, such as policy on indirect taxes. In addition to these tax items, the same model is being expanded to cover issues concerning housing and medical cards. The Deputy can appreciate the significant resources that need to be invested in the model to incorporate these effects, as well as the importance of these policy issues in Ireland at present. When included in the model, the measures will allow the simultaneous measurement of the impact of different policy areas on members of society by income, family status and economic status. It is not currently analytically possible within SWITCH to assess the impact of budgets on groups of people based on their marital or disability status. As I believe I have made apparent, there are already significant efforts under way to expand the capacity of the model to cover key issues currently affecting Ireland. Expanding the capacity of the model to include impacts on marital status, for example, would limit the ability to achieve the goals.

There are trade-offs that need to be borne in mind when it comes to thinking about the best way to expand the capability and coverage of the SWITCH model. It is essential to identify priorities among the many desirable improvements that one would wish to see in the modelling framework. However, as the Deputy may be aware, research by the ESRI indicates that budgets from budget 2009 to budget 2013 did not have a significant differential impact on people based on their gender. This reflects the fact that the tax and social welfare systems do not discriminate based on gender. Further versions of the SWITCH model may include gender-based analysis.

On the basis that the analysis proposed in the amendment is already published, or is due to be published, and given the infeasibility of aspects of the amendment, I cannot accept it. Deputy Michael McGrath has rightly drawn attention to the fact that the Technical Group has tabled a motion for tonight that covers some of the same ground referred to by Deputy Doherty.

There is a counter-motion tabled by the Government and there will be a further explanation of what is in mind tonight. It would not be appropriate for me, at 6.40 p.m., when a debate is scheduled for 7.30 p.m., to give a preview. However, the Deputy is correct. There is an initiative being taken which will further improve the general proofing of budgets. I thank the Technical Group for its lengthy proposal and I hope it will be pleased with the Government's response to it.

See this speech in context