Thursday, 30 May 2024

Bills

Financial Management Amendment (Gender Responsive Budgeting) Bill 2024

Committee

Resumed.

Clause 1 further considered (14:02)

Georgie CROZIER: Before question time we were speaking about the key metrics the government will use to monitor. I am just wondering: will the government’s annual financial statement report on these metrics?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: There is a budget paper 3 measure in relation to number of people trained. But as I said earlier, the outcomes framework measure is being developed, so once we have that, we will also have further measures.

Georgie CROZIER: Minister, clause 1 of the bill states that it includes:

… in the principles of sound financial management a requirement to consider and promote gender equality and inclusivity in the pursuit of spending and taxing policies …

I want to ask around that issue, around the principles of sound financial management: in the 2024–25 budget government forecasts that debt will reach $187.8 billion by mid-2028, so would the government categorise their financial management of the state’s balance sheet as being sound?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: Ms Crozier, really we are not talking about the budget as such here, we are talking about the broader framework settings that are created in relation to gender-responsive budgeting as a tool. That is really what this goes to as opposed to the question that was put.

Georgie CROZIER: I appreciate that you are trying to work in the gender response through this, but the very first point of clause 1 talks about the ‘principles of sound financial management’ and a requirement that this is then to be considered. My question is therefore: could you define what that ‘sound financial management’ is as a principle so that people can understand how the gender requirement then fits into that aspect?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: I think it is important that the questions as they are put here today are not about other acts, other legislation and definitions in other pieces of legislation. What we are talking about here is gender-responsive budgeting and it being a tool for identifying budget measures which go to closing gender gaps and advancing gender equality objectives. I appreciate that the questions that have been put might be of interest to the opposition, but what we need to go to here are questions in relation to this bill and gender-responsive budgeting.

Georgie CROZIER: Could I seek some guidance from you, please, Deputy President?

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes.

Georgie CROZIER: This bill amends the Financial Management Act 1994. Clause 1 goes to this very point – it speaks about the Financial Management Act and about the principles of sound financial management. So when the government comes in and says it is moving to gender-responsive budgeting, surely that has an impact on that Financial Management Act. I think my questions are in order, given that clause 1 refers to that act.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Ms Crozier, I am sorry, I cannot direct the minister how to answer the question, but it would be helpful if the minister was responsive.

Georgie CROZIER: Well, I will have another go, Minister. And if you are going to refuse to answer questions based on this, I think you have got to, frankly, go and start again with your bill, because the whole of clause 1, in fact this whole bill, is amending the Financial Management Act. It is ridiculous to say it has got nothing to do with it when point one of clause 1 makes it very clear that it is about principles of sound financial management. Anyway, I think it is clear the government does not have sound financial management, so I will move on. I am going to go back to a question around this because I do think it is relevant to women and what you are trying to achieve here. I will say it again before I ask the next question. Point one of clause 1 says:

to include in the principles of sound financial management a requirement to consider and promote gender equality and inclusivity in the pursuit of spending and taxing policies …

Okay? So that is in the context of that first point.

Interest on debt is expected to surpass $9 billion per year by mid-2028, representing $25.6 million each and every day. Does the government think that this level of spending to service their debt is financially sound and meeting the requirements of spending and taxing policies as outlined in clause 1 of this bill?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: I would just go back to what the purpose of this bill is. I appreciate that Ms Crozier might like to use this as an opportunity to canvass more broad-ranging issues, but what we are seeking to do here is introduce a gender-responsive budgeting tool which identifies budget measures that go to closing gender gaps and advancing gender equality. To want to turn this into a conversation that is perhaps better suited to a question time debate around debt and other issues I think is missing the point of what this bill is about and what questions should go to today, which is clarifying the intents of the bill, and what we are going to is gender-responsive budgeting and the development of that tool.

Georgie CROZIER: Have you read the bill, Minister?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: I have given it due consideration, Ms Crozier.

Georgie CROZIER: Then you would understand that in the first paragraph of the explanatory memorandum it says:

The Bill enshrines an enduring high level commitment to gender equality and inclusivity in spending and taxing policies …

That is what the bill says, so when we have got a government making decisions that are very high spending and very high taxing, when we have got $25.6 million a day in interest being paid and a debt that is running up to $187.8 billion in just a couple of years, I would contest that it is actually going to be worse for closing what this bill is trying to achieve, because things will get harder in this state. That is why I am asking these questions. I am just trying to get an understanding about what financially sound looks like in the reality of what the budget is doing.

You are not the Treasurer. I understand that. It is not your responsibility for those overall decisions, but you are responsible at the table for this bill, and in the context of the overall budget, when it is becoming very difficult, I am trying to understand how you are going to make it better for women through those tools that you speak about when there is just such high debt. I will go to this next one. Again, it goes to the principles of sound financial management. You may not be able to answer it. Over the past decade the use of Treasurer’s advances has grown by 3200 per cent, from $364 million in 2013 to $12.2 billion in 2022–23. Billions in taxpayers funds are being secretly stowed away for pre-election funding. Does the government think that this practice aligns with principles of sound financial management that go to the issue around spending and taxing policies and how women will be impacted through that initiative?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: You said it yourself, Ms Crozier: I am not the Treasurer. I appreciate the political pointscoring that you are attempting to achieve here, but this is perhaps an issue that is better suited to a question time discussion, or perhaps you could take some of these issues up with the Treasurer. But what we are here to answer right now are questions in the committee stage of this bill in relation to gender-responsive budgeting. What this bill is seeking to do is ensure that we have a tool to identify budget measures that will close gender gaps and advance gender equality in all circumstances.

Georgie CROZIER: If the debt is growing to $187.8 billion and interest is being paid at $25.6 million each and every day in just a couple of years, how is that going to help with that gender inclusivity that you speak of? People are going to lose their jobs. I know you were not listening to my speech, but I was talking about the impacts on women that this government’s policies are directly having. They are leading to a loss of jobs, a loss of access to services and high cost-of-living pressures, and that directly impacts women. I think your government’s policies are all wrong when you are increasing debt and interest payments to these extraordinary levels where women are the very people that are going to miss out. We have seen in the budget that kinder programs have been delayed. There have been cuts to women’s health. There had been cuts all across the budget. What you are trying to achieve here is going to have a negative impact given the dire situation that this state’s budget is in. I will move on to the next question because clearly you cannot answer it.

Clause 5 talks about empowering the minister to issue guidelines in relation to statements under the gender impacts of budgets in new division 4A of part 5 and gender impact assessments under new section 40AA. Can the government provide an overview of the scope of the guidelines the minister will be able to issue?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: As we have outlined previously, Victoria’s gender-responsive budgeting practice is built on the use of gender-impact assessments as a major tool to implement the practice across all of government. The Gender Equality Act 2020 requires gender impact assessments for policies, programs and services that will have a direct and significant impact on the public. There are many examples, but a clear example is in relation to pharmaceutical development trials. For example, the impact can reasonably be considered to be indirect and therefore an assessment would not be required under the Gender Equality Act 2020. However, if we did not include consideration of potential gender impacts from the beginning, the end results might be skewed or lead to exacerbating inequality. In situations like this the Treasurer would be able to request a gender impact assessment under the Financial Management Act 1994 and the amendments would work together and build on the requirements set out in the Gender Equality Act 2020 and clarify any inconsistencies or irregularities which may occur in the budgeting process. I will leave it there.

Georgie CROZIER: The bill does not provide a criterion for what a gender-responsive budget statement must contain. You mentioned the Financial Management Act and how it would apply. Has that guide been determined by the minister as yet, or is that still to be worked on?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: Consistent with current requirements that are specified in the Financial Management Act 1994 in relation to budget statements and publications, the bill outlines a high-level requirement for a statement of the gender equality impact of the budget without prescribing a specific detail to be included. This approach allows future governments to address the requirements in a manner appropriate to them and enables the form and structure of any statement to evolve over time. For example, a government may choose to publish specific information in a chapter of an existing budget paper or produce a separate or standalone budget paper.

Georgie CROZIER: What information will actually be reported on annually in the government’s gender-responsive budget statement then?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: As I have said previously, gender-responsive budgeting is an overarching term incorporating many different methods and tools, such as the gender impact assessments. It is important to look at international best practice. There is no single approach; instead, jurisdictions embed aspects of gender-responsive budgeting that are right for them. This bill does not define gender-responsive budgeting, because some practices may not fit Victoria and other practices may still evolve over time. However, while the bill does not define or prescribe gender-responsive budgeting as a specific term, it does legislate important gender-responsive budgeting practices – being, for example, the gender impact assessments and gender budgeting information included in budget documentation – under the Financial Management Act 1994, which ensures that legislation remains relevant and practical. It will prioritise Victorian gender-responsive budgeting practices and international best practice as they may evolve over time.

Georgie CROZIER: Minister, I am just seeking clarification after what you have just described. The annual reporting does not need to be undertaken because this gender statement or gender impact statement is quite fluid, as you said, and the minister can put in various things as they see fit. So is there any consistency, and what mechanisms are in place to ensure that consistency, transparency and accountability are in place for the preparation of the gender impact statement? What you just described was a free-for-all.

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: The statement will include information, as I have said, on the impacts of the budget on gender equality, and this may include the impacts of specific initiatives.

Georgie CROZIER: Well, thank you, but that does not give us any reassurance about transparency and consistency. It seems like it is just very loose. What are the measures important to Victoria? You mentioned other jurisdictions, and I am just wondering, as you keep saying that other jurisdictions are doing various things. But this in Victoria does not have any accountability, it can be opened up, and I am just wondering where on earth this bill is going to go to next?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: The budget papers include a compliance index of how the budget papers acquit legislative requirements, and this goes under independent Q and A as part of the budget production process, but I think what is clear in the presentation of this bill is that our priority is ensuring we have a gender-responsive budgeting tool which does go to ensuring that we have gender-responsive budgeting, which removes embedded inequalities by considering gender in all funding decisions which impact on Victorians.

Georgie CROZIER: Well, you have just opened yourself up, Minister. That last line about budget impacts to Victorians was exactly why I asked the questions previously about the debt.

Tom McIntosh interjected.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Mr McIntosh, Ms Crozier has the call.

Georgie CROZIER: Mr McIntosh, I know you want to be at the table, but you are not, and I am asking the minister.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: It is okay. Ms Crozier has the call. I ask that she be allowed to continue in silence.

Georgie CROZIER: I say again: the minister has just opened herself up around the budget, yet you refuse to answer questions relating to the budget, to the debt or to the interest payments that are going to directly impact women. It is farcical. On the government’s Victorian budget 2024–25 website under the ‘Gender Equality Budget Statement’ there are several announcements promoting investment in women’s health, skills and training, prevention of family violence and homelessness. Will future statements therefore also provide analysis on where the government’s budget falls short and fails women?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: As I have said a number of times now, clearly this bill is about implementing a tool that is ensuring gender-responsive budgeting. That means we will have a tool to remove embedded inequalities by considering gender in all funding decisions with a direct impact on Victorians, which identifies how resources can be best allocated to close gender gaps and which improves value for money by achieving gender equality goals concurrently with other policy goals. What this bill does is establish a tool that measures that.

Georgie CROZIER: It establishes a tool to measure them, but then you could not even answer whether it will be reported on annually. You could not answer that question, so you are creating a tool that is not going to be reported on annually. Is that correct?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: We are implementing a tool which will assist in the measurement of policies, but it is important to also note that no single piece of legislation can and should do this alone. It will work in concert with the Gender Equality Act 2020 to support improved design of policies, programs and services across government by taking into account how each affects the different needs of people of different genders and on different policy impacts.

Georgie CROZIER: You just mentioned different genders. How many genders are we talking about?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: As I have said a number of times, this is not about defining gender. It is about having a tool which looks at whether or not there are inequalities for people in the implementation of government policies.

Georgie CROZIER: Minister, you have said it is not about defining genders, but you have spoken about genders – plural. You cannot define what that is, so can I therefore assume that the government is leaving this wide open?

I want to go back to another statement before I get onto a question I have around that, though. On the government’s Victorian budget 2024–25 website under the ‘Gender Equality Budget Statement’ it states that 130 initiatives funded in the budget have ‘a positive impact on gender equality’ and nine initiatives ‘are expected to have a significant positive impact’. Will the outcomes of these programs as they relate to gender equality be reported on publicly?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: Sorry, Ms Crozier. Could you please repeat the question?

Georgie CROZIER: Sure. On the government’s Victorian budget 2024–25 website under the ‘Gender Equality Budget Statement’ it is stated that 130 initiatives funded in the budget have a positive impact on gender equality. Nine initiatives are expected to have a significant positive impact. So the question I asked was: will the outcomes of these programs, as they relate to gender equality, be reported on publicly?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: That is something that we would remain open to in the future, Ms Crozier.

Georgie CROZIER: In the same line of questioning then, if I may, have the government considered making public the initiatives that do not have a positive impact on gender equality and would they also be reporting on those publicly?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: That will remain under consideration as well, Ms Crozier.

Georgie CROZIER: This is my last question, so I am just going to skip to it. In clause 6 it speaks about the principles of sound financial management again and where this requires considering and promoting gender equality and inclusivity, already referred to in section 23D of the principal act. It says these include:

… taking into account, where possible, that gender inequality may be compounded by other forms of disadvantage or discrimination that a person may experience on the basis of Aboriginality, age, disability, ethnicity, gender identity, race, religion, sexual orientation and other attributes.

Does the government have plans to provide a tool such as you say this bill is doing for any of those groups that I have just referred to so that they also have inclusivity around principles of sound financial management in the pursuit of spending and taxing policies as outlined by this gender-responsive budgeting bill?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: Inclusivity in the consideration of empowering access to opportunity, addressing structural inequalities and developing inclusive organisations is preferred because it highlights the action of addressing the barriers to equality. The approach taken in the bill under clause 6 allows for factors to also be under consideration when reflecting on inclusivity, and these factors – which include taking into account where possible that gender inequality may be compounded by the forms of disadvantage or discrimination that a person may experience on the basis of Aboriginality, age, disability, ethnicity, gender identity, race, religion, sexual orientation and other attributes – mirror the considerations found under section 9 of the Gender Equality Act 2020.

Georgie CROZIER: How can that be done if you are not taking in any reporting or looking at those mechanisms that I spoke of earlier around consistency and transparency around this statement? You are saying, ‘Well, we’re open to all of those things,’ but you are actually not measuring what is happening under this bill through the gender impacts.

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: As I said earlier, the Minister for Women is developing a new gender equality outcomes framework. This will be realised in the future to provide a way to track these impacts.

Rachel PAYNE: Minister, submissions to the inquiry into gender-responsive budgeting suggested an accountability process through independent bodies. What independent review processes will this gender-responsive budgeting go through?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: As I have said, the Gender Equality Act 2020 sets out the requirements for when a gender impact assessment must be done and what it should cover, including requiring the gender impact assessment to include consideration of how policy programs are designed or reviewed as part of undertaking the assessment of equality, and there are opportunities for reviews of that.

In terms of what the government is doing in relation to the Public Accounts and Estimates Committee recommendation about an independent gender budget reviewing process, the government obviously supported the PAEC recommendation in principle and is undertaking analysis to better understand the scope of any other relevant considerations. This analysis will be supported by consultation on the most effective way to implement such a group. As outlined in our response to the PAEC recommendation, this may include a phased approach over time.

Our approach to implementing GRB was to initially to focus on embedding the gender impact assessments as part of the budget process, to continue enhancing the ‘Gender Equality Budget Statement’ and to evolve the other practices over time. The independent inquiry into economic equity for Victorian women reported to government in 2021. The report provided a set of gender equality priorities to guide government decision-making in the early stages of GRB in Victoria. This panel essentially delivered what an independent group would provide while we consider options for a longer term model as well.

Rachel PAYNE: Minister, what progress has been made on the government’s establishment of an independent gender equality budget group that would undertake an annual gender equality needs assessment of these kinds of government initiatives?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: As I have said in relation to what the government is doing in relation to the PAEC recommendation to have an independent gender budget committee or review group, my answer is the same as that given previously.

Rachel PAYNE: So the government is committed to establishing an independent gender equality budget group. That is being undertaken?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: As I have said, this has been or is in the process of being explored. It was a recommendation that was supported in principle. The government continues to consider options for consultation as part of gender-responsive budgeting, which could include an independent gender-responsive budgeting advisory group as outlined previously in our PAEC recommendation response. This may include a phased approach over time.

Rachel PAYNE: Minister, does this government continue to reject the Austrian model of publishing gender impact analysis details for all initiatives in the budget papers?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: As I have said, the proposal that is before us today is the government’s current proposal, which is establishing a gender-responsive budgeting tool to identify budget measures that will close gender gaps and advance gender equality objectives.

Rachel PAYNE: Will the statement of gender impacts include comparing outcomes against objectives, targets and indicators in a way that demonstrates measurable progress? I do note the minister previously answered questions around a tool that would be a measure of policies, programs and services. Am I thinking correctly that the tool is also accessible for managing objectives and targets?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: Yes. As I said earlier, the Minister for Women is developing a new gender equality outcomes framework, which will be realised in the future and will provide a way to track impacts.

Rachel PAYNE: Am I correct in anticipating that that information will be public?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: I am advised that it will be.

Rachel PAYNE: This will be my last question for the minister. Can the minister provide any examples of programs that have been varied in response to a gendered analysis of their impacts?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: I am advised that any such information would be cabinet in confidence.

Clause agreed to; clauses 2 to 11 agreed to.

Reported to house without amendment.

Lizzie BLANDTHORN (Western Metropolitan – Minister for Children, Minister for Disability) (14:43): I move:

That the report be now adopted.

Motion agreed to.

Report adopted.

Third reading

Lizzie BLANDTHORN (Western Metropolitan – Minister for Children, Minister for Disability) (14:43): I move:

That the bill be now read a third time.

Motion agreed to.

Read third time.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Pursuant to standing order 14.28, the bill will be returned to the Assembly with a message informing them that the Council have agreed to the bill without amendment.