Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent) | Oireachtas source

Those of us of a certain age and with a certain taste in music might remember a song from way back called "Games People Play". I was struck by some of the lines in it. I will not sing it but the lines are:

Games people play every day and night,

Never meaning what they say, never saying what they mean,

While they while away their hours in an ivory tower.

That is the view of many Irish people when they come to look at the Oireachtas, that we are living in an ivory tower that does not bear much relationship to the reality of people's lives. When I was thinking of the topic of this Private Members' motion those lines kept going around in my mind. While we are in here do we say what we mean, do we mean what we say and when are we going to move out of that ivory tower and be more engaged with reality?

Private Members' time is an opportunity to stop and reflect on what kind of country we want to see develop and that we want to live in. It could be part of President Higgins's ethics initiative and the Houses, the Dáil and the Seanad, should have a debate on that topic also. There are two aspects to this Private Members' motion, one of which is philosophical. Politics sometimes neglects philosophy to its disadvantage. The philosophical debate is about our values, priorities and the principles we want to see that will guide our vision for our country for the future and that will guide us as to how we are going to bring about a more equal society.

I have been here a relatively short time compared to others, just more than five years and I have been through a number of budgets. Each year a number of us call for a social impact analysis of budgets. As the motion states, we do not do adequate assessments of the impact of budgetary decisions. We are out of the official budget season, as such, even though we debated the Finance Bill earlier. At this time of the year there is an opportunity to consider other aspects when it comes to budgets.

The newspapers reported last week that the European Commission, the European Central Bank and the IMF - and the fiscal council as reported in today's newspapers - were all sounding alarm bells and making noises about additional measures and further cuts and macroeconomic adjustments. It is almost like they are saying there will be another austerity budget and more cuts. However, we must agree that, regardless of who is in power, there are sections of society which have borne the brunt of those cuts to date and they must be left out of any further equation on this and those sections of society which did not even know we were in a recession should contribute proportionately.

Ireland has signed a number of international human rights treaties which means we are committed to human rights and dignity. In recessions and especially in times of cutbacks and austerity those human rights must be respected, protected and realised. Under international law, human rights covers certain categories. For example, States must do everything possible so that everyone in a jurisdiction has a basic level of subsistence to live in dignity. States must take account of the impact of cuts on the most vulnerable. The cuts must be effected in a non-discriminatory and a transparent way in consultation with affected groups. Because we have signed up to international human rights treaties, that is not optional, it is obligatory.

In June 2015 Ireland will be examined under economic, social and cultural rights. The question is how we are we going to fare. Everybody wants to do well in an exam situation but there will be serious questions and serious concerns for Ireland. That makes it even more imperative that we take a human rights approach to budgeting, that we have adequate and meaningful impact assessments and that we have equality and gender-proofing. If there was a commitment to that, we would see much greater progress towards that equal society to which we are all committed.

Ireland has a place on the United Nations Human Rights Council and we are a voice, and a respected one, for the human rights of those in the developing world but we are not always a consistent voice for the human rights of Irish citizens. The motion acknowledges there are signs of recovery and no doubt those on the Government side will point out all those signs of recovery. It is fantastic to hear about jobs being created in various parts of the country but - there is a but - when the Government talks about percentages and statistics indicating recovery, it is not always felt in an equitable way by all sections of society. The reality is that we have deprivation. There are people who do not have the necessities of life. An increasing number of people are homeless on the streets or in accommodation that is not conducive to dignity. If we walk anywhere in this city, and we need not go too far from these Houses, we will meet homeless people. On 11 November more than 168 people were sleeping rough in Dublin. Yesterday Sr. Stanislaus Kennedy of Focus Ireland said she has never seen the extent of homelessness and crisis in housing in all her years working on the issue as she is seeing now. It is an issue that is worsening every day.

I want to deal with health inequality. I refer to a recent report completed at NUI Maynooth. It saw a disparity and inequality between those from poorer socioeconomic backgrounds and those at the other end of that spectrum. Recent data from it showed a fatality rate from cancer of 382 per 100,000 people in Blakestown compared with almost one third of that figure - 128 out of 100,000 - in Castleknock just a few miles away. The stage at which cancer is diagnosed has a huge impact on the outcome and again those in deprived areas tend to present later at a more advanced stage. The follow-up care is essential and again there are disparities. There are higher instances of cancers with lower rates of survival within more disadvantaged areas. The disparity holds across all stages of cancer even allowing for correction for certain lifestyle issues. The differences are very salient. I acknowledge the excellent cancer treatment we have in Ireland and the report stated that once inside acute services background has no impact on service, but the point is that there is an inequality.

There is also an inequality when it comes to addiction services. Those with private means and private health insurance can access residential treatment easily. If one does not have private means and private health insurance, the person in addiction will have to wait. Those who work with those in addiction know that when the motivation is high, that is the time to move into treatment. Those in addiction without means are sometimes put on a methadone programme but we have also seen that those in addiction can die while they are waiting to move into a residential treatment centre. One of the questions I pose is to whom does the Government listen when it comes to budgets and making decisions. What role do those in Irish civil society and the voluntary and community sector have, those organisations that know the reality and the real impact of budgets on families? We know budgets are not just about one day because their impacts are felt for years.

Organisations acknowledge the Department of Society Protection is the one Department that makes an effort to hear from affected people. Some of the organisations are invited to appear before the social protection committee and they then put recommendations to the Minister. Most organisations believe the process would be much improved if other committees, especially the finance committee, did the same and if they could have impact assessments on the effects any proposed changes would have on those likely to be adversely affected - if committees and Departments had information from civil society on the reality of the impacts and the implications, in other words, if they were committed to human rights being at the core of budgets. Many groups from all sectors of society make submissions but I have to ask are they worth the paper they are written on if there is no real engagement. We need to widen and promote genuine prebudget efforts from civil society because engagement to date has not been meaningful. We can look to Scotland's approach to equality budgeting as an example of good practice regarding transparency and equality proofing.

I have another question related to the Economic Management Council.

Who do they talk to before budget decisions are made? Do they ever speak to anybody from the voluntary and community sector?

We need a process for budgets, a human rights law framework, that is transparent, participatory and accountable in accordance with our duties and commitments under international law. We need, and Irish people deserve, budgets that are socially just and economically sustainable. The philosophies, socially just and economically sustainable, are not mutually exclusive.

See this speech in context