A fairer budgetary process is required

Some commentators have greeted this year’s budget as ‘tough but fair’, citing some of the more positive measures as proof of the Government’s commitment to both economic recovery and social cohesion.

But while some measures have been progressive, there are clearly areas where the thinking was, at best, not joined-up. What is clear is that people who are already in difficulty — those in mortgage arrears, lone parents, disabled people, Travellers, young people, older people on low incomes — will certainly not be helped and probably see their situation worsen.

So while it would be nice to have the luxury of waiting for the tide to rise again and see whether it will lift our sinking boats, for those whose boats never rose and for those whose boats have been sinking rapidly, this budget will not fix things.

However, today, organisations representing all facets of society, particularly those more vulnerable to budget cuts, are gathering in Dublin. For the first time, they will collectively discuss the impact of the budget on such groups. They will look at how the Government can improve the way it makes its budget decisions. Their wealth of perspectives and experiences will offer an alternative narrative to that being sold by the Government. Because up to now, there has been neither a verifiable guarantee of, nor objective standards for, fairness and openness in how our Government decides to spend State finances.

After six years of austerity, this gathering of diverse groups is calling for a smarter, fairer, and more open approach to budgeting in the face of undeniably difficult choices. Specifically, the groups will reflect on whether minimum human rights standards and equality impact assessment of budget proposals must be built into the budgetary process.

The 50 groups meeting today, organised by the Public Interest Law Alliance, the Equality Budgeting Campaign, and FLAC, represent vulnerable people right across society. They will be discussing ways to make the ongoing budget process — because budgeting is a year-round activity, not just a single day of frenzied reportage in autumn — fairer, more transparent, and more feasible for people to live with than we currently have. Things like minimum living standards, as promoted by the Vincentians and adopted by the new Insolvency Service; things like budgetary impact assessments, as used in Scotland; things like better, more regular consultation with social groups and compliance with international human rights law.

A focus on equality would tackle pre-budget kite-flying, whereby potential cuts are leaked to gauge public reaction.

These have meant that the most marginalised and least popular groups in society have borne the brunt of austerity. For example, figures from Traveller groups show government disinvestment in the Traveller community since 2008 has been drastic, with an overall cut in government spending of about 4.3%, education initiatives for Travellers reduced by 86.6%, and spending on Traveller accommodation slashed by 85%.

Human rights budgeting would end the current ‘no holds barred’ approach to cuts. It would identify the minimum resources needed to live with dignity in Ireland and draw a red line below which nobody should be allowed to fall, even in a recession. Ireland is obliged under international human rights law to protect this ‘minimum core’ of rights. This is not optional. Incorporating a minimum human rights standard as part of the budgetary process would alleviate much unnecessary fear and desperation for thousands of individuals and families around the country.

Such tools will not solve every single budget-related problem. However, they will increase fairness and transparency around such hugely important decisions, building consensus and approval among stakeholders, and setting fair, objective standards that meet international legal standards.

These measures and many others will be debated as to whether they could make for a better budget. There will be a common statement from the participating organisations at the end of the discussion and hopefully, the groups will find a way to keep up the pressure and the proposals for change. Because we definitely need an alternative to the top-down, cart-before-the-horse, one-size-fits-all approach of government that we currently have.

* Emma McCarron is a legal assistant with the Public Interest Law Alliance, a project of FLAC, and is involved in the Equality Budgeting Campaign. For more, see www.pila.ie, www.flac.ie, and www.equalitybudgeting.ie.