Response to Department of Finance Briefing on Northern Ireland Budgetary Outlook Contact: Ellen Finlay, Policy Officer Children in Northern Ireland Unit 9, 40 Montgomery Road Belfast BT6 9HL Tel: 028 9040 1290 Fax: 028 9070 9418 Email: info@ci-ni.org.uk
Children in Northern Ireland (CiNI) are the regional umbrella body for the children s sector in Northern Ireland. CiNI represents the interests of its 160-member organisations providing policy, information, training, and participation support services to members in their direct work with and for children and young people. CiNI membership also includes colleagues in the children s statutory sector recognising that the best outcomes for children and young people are increasingly achieved working in partnership with all those who are committed to improving the lives of children and young people in NI. CiNI welcomes this opportunity to provide some feedback on the Northern Ireland Budgetary Outlook. We trust that our comments will be positively used to inform the next step in the process. Overview Firstly, we welcome the direction of travel outlined in the briefing, in that, in order to balance the budget, we must look at options of increasing revenue using the limited fiscal powers available to Northern Ireland such as the introduction of a fairer rating system, further environmental charges (plastic bag tax levy) and the re-introduction of prescription charges. While we applaud the Department of Finance in its effort to list options, we cannot support any such options until consideration is given to the effects (both immediate and cumulative) of these. Children in Northern Ireland feel that the options lack sufficient information to allow for a reasoned and informed response about how the cuts will impact on the lives of children and young people and their families in Northern Ireland. We would also remind the Department of its legal and statutory obligations under Section 75. A full equality impact assessment which
takes account of any budget decision needs to be completed as soon as possible. This information would provide clarity to any budget decision and would allow a strategic overview to ensure those most in need are not adversely impacted by any of these options. Comments We believe a cost benefit analysis should be carried out on the effects any budget decision has on those living in Northern Ireland, particularly the most vulnerable. Looking at child poverty, throughout the UK it is expected to rise; it has become apparent that the 2020 statutory targets to end child poverty will be missed by a huge distance. In Northern Ireland the latest figures show that in 2016/15 21% of children are living in relative poverty and 18% in absolute poverty before housing costs. 1 The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) forecasts that one in three children will be living below the poverty line by 2020, and economic modelling commissioned by Save the Children predicts that relative child poverty levels will increase to 38% (AHC) by 2020. 2 Evidence outlined in Beneath the Surface: Child Poverty in Northern Ireland 3 presented a bleak picture about the state of child poverty in Northern Ireland. If trends continue as forecast, child poverty, income inequality and social mobility will get worse. The figures above may not even represent the full picture because the disability sector argues that counting disability benefits as income masks the true extent of child poverty. The report went on to suggest that the harsh reality of inadequate incomes is forcing families into debt and an increased reliance on food banks. Save the Children has long highlighted the fact that it 1 https://www.communities-ni.gov.uk/sites/default/files/publications/communities/ni-poverty-bulletin- 201516.pdf 2 Save the Children, A Fair Start for Every Child: NI Executive Summary, Belfast: Save the Children, 2014, p 5 3 Child Poverty Alliance, Beneath the Surface Child Poverty in Northern Ireland, Belfast, 2014
costs more to be poor because low income families often pay a poverty premium or additional costs for basic necessities, such as energy, insurance and household goods, amounting to over 1700 each year. We therefore need a budget which is fairly shared not only to grow the economy but also to raise revenue and at the same time supporting those most in need. Children s Sector / Community & Voluntary Sector The community and voluntary sector plays an important role to society in Northern Ireland, not only do we deliver public services on behalf of government, we provide additional support for communities, families and children and young people. It is our view therefore, that the sector should not bear the brunt of or be subjected to disproportionate cuts when decisions on the budget are made as this would be counter-productive and prove more costly in the long term. Any budget cuts to the sector will have profound ramifications across the whole population. We would like a strong commitment when decisions about budgets are made that there will be no top slicing budgets, no inyear cuts or disproportionate cuts to the community and voluntary sector as a starting point for decisions. We appreciate the difficult economic climate; however, we must strongly advocate that disproportionate cuts in services for children and young people is counter-productive. We would like to see further commitment to the likes of projects that could increase income such as childcare. At a time of economic austerity, the benefits of investing early in a child s life are well-documented. However, the converse is also true: tremendous opportunities are lost when sufficient resources are not made available to meet the needs of children and young people. The timeline of a child s life means that occasions for intervention are short and the consequences of absent,
unclear, or inadequate policies can be significant. CiNI recommends that consideration is given to long-term, evidence-informed investment in childcare services for children and young people, rather than the current piece-meal approach. Children in Northern Ireland are concerned that decisions will be taken that will reverse any good practice. Moreover, there has been growing momentum within and across government in support of early intervention and preventative spending to secure better outcomes for children, young people, and families. The research evidence in support of such an approach continues to grow and the economic case in support of utilising scarce resources to best effect is well acknowledged. CiNI would highlight the RLS Research Paper 4 which, reflecting on the Scottish Finance Committee Inquiry into Preventative Spending, notes that while Northern Ireland is one of the most economically deprived regions of the UK, each year government spends a significant amount of money treating the outcomes associated with deprivation rather than on preventative solutions aimed at breaking the cycle. All the evidence to the Scottish Inquiry attested to preventative spending as the key to breaking the cycle of deprivation, expressed concern regarding the insufficient investment in preventative spend, and pointed to the real and lasting savings that are possible if government were to adopt a preventative spending approach. The Scottish Inquiry identified three ideas for financing preventative spending: 4 RLS (2011) Preventative Spending NIAR 19-11
A proportional shift in the emphasis of government spending towards preventative programmes, with the savings increasingly reinvested in preventative schemes Greater use of pooled cross departmental budgets set aside to tackle issues Frontloading social investment with the issue of social impact bonds Critically the RLS Research Paper concludes that cross-departmental partnership and joined up government are the required foundations for preventative spending interventions. Given these conclusions, it is therefore imperative that spending on early intervention and prevention should not be lost. Indeed, we need to remind you of the Children s Services Co-operation Act that places a duty on Departments to work together and pool budgets to improve outcomes for children and young people. So much more could be achieved if there were greater levels of awareness and joined up working. If we are to ensure the best outcomes for all children and young people and their families, there must be a shift. Prioritise Children and Young People As a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) the UK Government is obliged to deliver all the Convention rights for children and young people in Northern Ireland in a manner that is non-discriminatory (article 2), protects and promotes their best interests (article 3), ensures their survival and maximum development
(article 6); and ensures their voices are heard and given due weight in decision making processes (article 12). Any decisions on budgets should be in line with the consideration and recommendations of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child. The Committee upholds the concept of investing in children as a widely accepted best guarantee for achieving equitable and sustainable human development and a fundamental requirement for social and economic priorities of any government 5 It s most recent recommendation Investing in Children: Breaking the Cycle of Disadvantage must be adhered to. Acknowledging that investment in children has high economic return the Committee recommends that government a) make children a priority in the budgetary allocations as a means to ensure the highest return of the limited available resources; and make investment in children visible in the State budget through detailed compilation of the resources allocated to them; b) consider using rights-based budget monitoring and analysis, as well as child impact assessments on how investments in any sector may serve the best interests of the child We would highlight the particular relevance and importance of article 4 of the UNCRC which states: State parties shall undertake all legislative, administrative and other measures for the implementation of the rights recognised in the present Convention. With regard to economic, social, and cultural rights, State parties shall undertake such measures to the maximum extent of their 5 CRC (2007)Day of General Discussion Resources for the rights of the child Responsibility of States para 27
available resources, and, where needed, within the framework of international co-operation. The Committee stated in its 2008 Concluding Observations, that while noting with appreciation the increases in expenditure on children, it remained concerned that the increases were not sufficient to eradicate poverty and tackle inequalities. The Committee also noted that the lack of budgetary analysis and child rights impact assessment make it difficult to identify how much expenditure is allocated to children. In view of these observations the Committee recommended that the State Party, in accordance with article 4 of the Convention, allocate the maximum extent of available resources for the implementation of children s rights, with a special focus on eradicating poverty and reducing inequalities across all jurisdictions child rights impact assessment should be regularly conducted to evaluate how the allocation of budget is proportionate to the realisation of policy developments and the implementation of legislation. Commenting specifically on article 4, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child does state that article 4 reflects a realistic acceptance that lack of resources financial and other resources can hamper the realisation of economic, social, and cultural rights in some States, however it introduces the concept of progressive realisation of these rights. States need to be able to demonstrate that they have implemented to the maximum extent of their available resources. The Committee is very clear in its view that even where the available resources are demonstrably inadequate, the obligation remains for a State party to strive to ensure the widest possible enjoying of the relevant rights under the prevailing circumstances. As a signatory to the Convention decisions regarding the Northern Ireland budget, whatever their economic circumstances, are required to
undertake all possible measures towards the realisation of the rights of the child, paying special attention to the most disadvantaged groups 6. The Committee has further called for children to be made visible in budgets commenting no state can tell whether it is fulfilling children s economic, social and cultural rights, to the maximum extent of available resources, as it is required to do under article 4, unless it can identify the proportion of national or other budgets allocated to the social sector, and within that, to children, both directly and indirectly. Some states have claimed it is not possible to analyse budgets in this way. But others have done it and publish annual children s budgets. It is our strong view that in light of the obligations of the Child Poverty Act, the budget decisions must deliver a special focus on eradicating child poverty and reducing inequalities within a framework to ensure progressive realisation of all of the Convention rights, free of any caveats relating to the prevailing economic circumstances. Increasing Revenue We are supportive of increasing revenue otherwise we would have a very one-sided budget. However, policies which have benefited the better-off must be looked at. Consideration should be given to a progressive rating system, progressive water charges, the reintroduction of prescription charges, redistribution from those who are well-paid out of the public purse and targeting EU Funding at a more progressive level. 6 UN Committee on the Rights of the Child General Comment No. 5 (2003) General measures of implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, CRC/GC/2003/5
There must also be consideration of how Government Departments will work together to save costs, for example Departments should be encouraged to share premises with others while empty government buildings should be leased/rented to provide an income stream. Reductions in the number of Departments and the number of MLAs must also be considered. Every single payment made from the public purse must be scrutinised including the levels of pension pot increases, the amount being paid in legal aid, the amount paid to consultants and the duplication of work within departments. Equality Legislation Duty Obviously and budget decisions will have an impact upon children and young people. We suggest that consultation should be carried out with children and young people when the proposals are at that stage. Such consultation is essential not only in ensuring compliance with Section 75, but also in ensuring the Government s compliance with Article 12 of the UNCRC, one of the principles of the UNCRC - Respect for the views of the Child. In examining the government s compliance with Article 12, the UNCRC Committee recommended that the government,...take further steps to promote, facilitate and monitor systematic, meaningful and effective participation of all groups of children in society. 7 Also, the Equality Commission s, Guidance for Implementing Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 states that consultation should take place in accordance with its stated Guiding Principles on Consultation, 7 Para 30 CRC/C/15/Add.188
...specific consideration is given to how best to communicate information to children and young people... [3] We understand that a full EQIA has not been undertaken at this stage. There is a need for full and proper adherence to statutory equality duties and to the common law duty to consult, including adequate time for full public consultation and engagement, particularly with affected groups and individuals to ensure that proper consideration is given to how potential adverse impact for equality categories can be effectively mitigated. It is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to make informed comment on the implications for equality of opportunity through the budget scenarios if such EQIA information is not made available to as part of this process. Conclusion We are deeply concerned about the many issues outlined above which will lead to other more severe problems as a result of previous cuts and any decision taken in a vacuum could ultimately impact upon the local economy leading to a downward spiral. We advocate working together to prevent this happening which is why we hope the above comments will improve the outcome. We very much welcome the opportunity to respond to this briefing.