I am delighted to have an opportunity to speak this morning about an issue of such importance – the Developmental Welfare State. This debate – and the analysis provided in the Council’s Report – will help to inform decisions, which will shape Irish society for decades to come.
I would like to thank Rory O’Donnell, John Sweeney and their colleagues for organising this Conference and I am delighted that so many of you have taken the time to participate in this discussion.
Introduction
For a long time – decades even – our social policies were held back by our poor economic performance. Recent growth has given us greater scope to make positive choices about social provision. More importantly, this study shows that we have reached a stage in our national development where our future economic performance needs a greater concentration on social policies. This is a challenge Government wholeheartedly accepts.
We must bring the same determination to Ireland’s social policies as we successfully brought to bear on improving our economy over the last two decades. In the 1980s, few believed that we had the ability to transform our economy so radically – yet today we are viewed across the world as a case study of good practice. I do not see any reason why we can not repeat that success in the social area.
This debate is also timely given the current focus across the EU on reform of the welfare state. The work undertaken by the Council is an important part of the Irish contribution to mutual learning as the EU seeks to progress social inclusion as part of the Lisbon Agenda. Many Member States are engaged in active reform processes – trying to retain the strengths of the European Social Model while adapting to a globalised economy and internal structural pressures.
It is clear to me that this is not about a choice between Boston and Berlin – rather each country must make decisions regarding the best approach for their circumstances. It is encouraging to observe the experience of some smaller EU countries, who have shown great capacity for innovation in their response to social issues. Equally, we must learn from the difficulties faced by countries seeking to overcome structural rigidities built into their welfare systems over decades.
Challenges
We do not have the high unemployment or large elderly populations that welfare states amongst some of our EU neighbours currently contend with. But we all know that we do face serious social challenges:
Firstly, there is the deep-rooted social disadvantage of a section of the population, which remains dependent on means-tested social assistance. Here the challenge is to improve systems, which embody low expectations and achieve low outcomes for a minority;
Secondly, there are excessive pressures on many people at work who want to improve their employment prospects and their family lives. The challenge here is to develop the services, such as childcare, eldercare, housing, transport and training, which help people to remain attached to the workforce in a flexible way throughout their lives; and
Thirdly, we need to ensure that our values – respect for the individual, human dignity and solidarity – are fully reflected in the standards of social protection extended to people with disabilities, the very elderly and people in institutional care. The challenge here is to proceed even faster than in recent years, with a thorough revision of the assumptions, practices and standards that we have inherited from an earlier Ireland.
I am pleased that the Council has recognised the Government’s current effort to deliver a Strategy, which will ensure that people with disabilities can participate on an equal basis in society. As the report highlights, this is a complex and demanding process – with the potential to deliver significant improvements in service to a long-neglected part of society.
Of course, in many instances, additional resources do not guarantee results. New ways of working, new policy instruments and institutional innovations are required to deliver the necessary improvements.
We need to have an over-arching framework to identify and prioritise social spending and minimise oversights and imbalances. Only in this way can we give people confidence that their taxes are being used fairly and well.
An emphasis on services
Many people associate social spending with social welfare payments. However, increases in social welfare alone will not overcome many of the challenges we face. The obstacles to full participation in society and the economy are of a different kind. They include, for example:
- access to childcare by lone parents;
- education and training for people with low skills;
- secure and attractive neighbourhoods; and
- public services and public places that are accessible to persons with disabilities.
These challenges are not unique to Ireland, they are indeed at the heart of Government discussions in all developed societies. Even the longest-established Welfare States are required to renew their approach to meet the challenge of demographics and structural change. Even where universal access to publicly funded services is concerned, the report highlights the pivotal significance of high quality services to which there is universal access, but where the means of access are tailored to individual’s specific circumstances.
Delivering these improved services is a major challenge – a challenge, which requires a response from all the social partners. The report suggests that a more networked management approach be developed, and embraced more decisively by the multiple actors involved and that the State’s role be redefined and re-equipped adequately to discharge its role.
The changes needed will require more dynamic roles for the public service, which must embrace proactively the management, organisational and technological changes required. The report makes a strong case for the proposition that improving quality across the spectrum of public services – in public hospital wards, in schools, in social housing – is the best way to ensure that people will be content to pay for inclusive public services rather than for exclusive private ones.
People of working age
Significant social progress is inherent in the process of economic development. For example, raising the employment rate further means that we must pay more attention to the specific obstacles faced and supports needed by specific groups in the working-age population. This is not, in the first place, a measure to boost the supply of labour. It is principally to improve the well-being and quality of life of the people concerned. After all, as the report points out, these people are also living in a society where having a job, completing the Leaving Cert, being familiar with the internet, and so on, are increasingly regarded as ‘normal accomplishments’.
People parenting alone, persons with disabilities, people who have been jobless or working in the home for many years, members of the Traveller community, and so many others, are right to be knocking on the door of our economy looking for the dignity of a job that will acknowledge and develop their skills and potential.
This study provides a rich and balanced analysis of what is usually but unhelpfully termed “the problem of welfare dependency”. In my experience, people do not make potentially life-determining choices - for example becoming a lone parent - in order to live the rest of their lives on means-tested social assistance. I do recognise, however, the difficulties they may have in leaving it once they have been reliant upon it for a long time. I think the Department of Social and Family Affairs will find encouragement in this study to go further in removing any resemblance that social assistance payments continue to have to be an ‘exclusion wage’.
Economic Performance and Social Protection
The report suggests that good economic performance and improved social protection are neither intrinsically opposed - nor do they inevitably occur together. Rather, they can be made to support each other. Social policy is not simply an exercise in redistributing a surplus, there to be creamed off after successful economic performance. The composition and manner of social spending are as significant as its level.
Many of those debating Ireland’s social progress have, in recent years, been at cross purposes. Some believe Ireland’s economic development has sacrificed compassion, social standards and solidarity. Others believe that an increased emphasis on social protection will erode the economy’s cost competitiveness. The Council shows that the development of a dynamic, knowledge-based economy can serve social justice and a fairer society, and that the creation of a truly developmental welfare state is integral to sustaining our economic success. In a globalised world, the strength of Ireland’s economy and the attractiveness of its society will rest on the same foundation – the human qualities of those who participate in both.
Concluding Remarks
I think my remarks have made clear the importance, which the Government attaches to the analysis put forward by the Council in this report. The value of the policy directions proposed is strengthened by the fact that they represent the outcome of discussions involving the social partners and other Council members.
This is an important and stimulating report. It deserves careful attention and reflection by all of us involved with public policy. I am sure it will be seen as one of those important NESC reports, which influence thinking and practice on a broad basis. It will attract interest in the international policy community, as well as here at home.
I would like to conclude by thanking all the members and staff of the Council for their work on this report. I know that it will provide a central input to the forthcoming Strategy, which the Council is preparing in advance of the next round of social partnership negotiations. Through this and other mechanisms, it will inform decisions by Government over the next few years.
I wish you well with the remainder of the Conference and I look forward to hearing about the outcome from your discussions.
Thank you.
ENDS