Equal Opportunities Committee, 02 Oct 2007

Meeting date: Tuesday, October 2, 2007

Official Report 107KB pdf

---

Budget Process 2008-09

Agenda item 3 is on the budget process. Members have the clerk's paper before them. The draft budget is not due to be published until mid to late November, but the paper sets out various actions that the committee might wish to take in advance. Do members have any general comments on the paper before we look at the recommendations in detail?

As a member of the Equal Opportunities Committee in the previous session, I was a little concerned by the quotation from the legacy paper that the committee had

"agreed to step back its equalities scrutiny of the budget".

Although the idea of stepping back seems to be problematic, the budget paper goes on to explain in detail what we will be doing, which will be taking a different approach rather than stepping back. I am pleased that the committee will take seriously its scrutiny of the budget process, because it is essential that we do so.

If members have no further comments, I have a comment about the legacy paper. When we looked at some of the strategies for equality proofing, we got caught up in the language used rather than getting to grips with some of the tangible equality proofing outcomes that the committee hoped to monitor and put in place. We hoped to look at how resources are spent and the consequent outcomes. It would be superb if we could focus more on that.

Let us look at the various recommendations in the budget paper, the first of which is on page 4. Before commencing formal scrutiny of the draft budget, and recognising the limited time available, members are invited to consider whether they wish to receive a more detailed and factual briefing on equality proofing the budget from the equality proofing budget and policy advisory group, which was set up by the Scottish Executive and has a broad membership of people who have looked at equality issues. It would be worth while to hear from that group. Do members also wish to hear from the Scottish women's budget group? I have met the members of that group privately and was impressed with their knowledge of the problems of equality proofing as a cross-cutting issue.

It is absolutely right that those groups come along and advise us. I support the recommendation and ask that if any relevant papers are available, we have them in advance of the next meeting.

That is fine. Are we all agreed that we will ask the equality proofing budget and policy advisory group and the Scottish women's budget group to speak to the committee?

Members indicated agreement.

The next recommendation is in paragraph 27. Members are asked to decide whether they wish to discuss with the current Finance Committee budget adviser the appropriate role of the Equal Opportunities Committee in the budget scrutiny process. Alternatively, the committee might want to appoint its own budget adviser.

Given the short timescale for scrutiny, it is important that the committee looks to appoint its own budget adviser and I recommend that course of action. That budget adviser might then wish to discuss the scrutiny role in more detail with the Finance Committee budget adviser; in fact, the two options might not necessarily be exclusive because the committee might wish to do that as well.

I would like to promote the idea that we appoint our own budget adviser. We would have to take into account the short timescale in determining the work that the adviser would do for us but, because the timescales are short, it is important that we have someone who can examine the budget with equality eyes and advise us accordingly.

I support Elaine Smith's position on appointing an adviser. It is important that we have an equal opportunities focus on the budget. The subject committees all have their own portfolio areas to deal with and it is important that we are no less well advised than them on the budget.

Are we agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

The committee will look to appoint its own adviser. We will have to ask the Parliamentary Bureau for permission to appoint an adviser. Our paper to the bureau will outline a person specification—obviously, we will be looking for somebody with expertise in Government finance with an equal opportunities perspective. It will also include specific duties that the adviser would perform, such as advising the committee on witnesses, its analysis of the evidence and the drafting of the final report.

I understand that we are about to go into recess, but arrangements can be made to put the paper in front of the bureau as soon as possible so that, when we meet again after the recess, we will—I hope—have approval and the Scottish Parliament information centre will have drawn up a list of potential advisers.

Is everyone happy with that?

Members indicated agreement.

The next recommendation is in paragraph 30:

"Members are invited to discuss whether they wish to write to the Scottish Government, in order to understand the equality principles that will shape the presentation of the forthcoming Draft Budget and Spending Review document."

Are we in favour of that?

Definitely. It is a really good idea to write and it is timely that we do it now, before the budget is set in stone, as a reminder to everybody of the importance of the equality principles.

Hugh, do you have something to say?

Marlyn has adequately covered what I was going to say.

It is important that, right at the beginning of the session, we establish the fact that we want everyone in the Parliament to pursue the equality agenda.

It sounds like we are all agreed with that recommendation.

I will recap. The committee has decided that it will receive a briefing from the equality proofing budget and policy advisory group and the Scottish women's budget group. It will discuss with the Finance Committee's budget adviser the appropriate budget scrutiny role for the committee. It will seek permission to appoint its own budget adviser and will ask the Scottish Government to explain the equality principles that will shape the draft budget and spending review document.

The last recommendation, which I have not mentioned although it is the most important, is:

"The Committee is invited to discuss whether it wishes to incorporate, where possible, budget considerations into its work."

Are we agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

That is a resounding yes. It is fundamental to the committee's work.