Gender Budgeting :Modernity and good governance; a practical, utilitaristic, pragmatic approach:

Frankfurt; EU- conference on Gender Budgetting, June 4 and 5th 2007

Thank you, Mme Chair, for giving me the floor and the possibility to present some of the Norwegian and Nordic experiences within the field of gender-sensitive budgets. My presentation will be from within government and working close to the Cabinet. I hope these points will be of relevance to you.

Firstly, the vision of Gender Equality from the Norwegian Government: " To obtain real and substantial equality between the genders, we have to redistribute work, care and power"
 
GB is no more no less,  than a practical and systematic approach to the fact that population consists of 2 genders, which still experience different living conditions and different expectations from society. (I think this more or less covers the Nordic Position, also summed up in the booklet "Now it's about the Money", final project report 2004 -2006, from the cooperation on GB within the Nordic Council of Ministers)

These differences prevailing, (and they do, and probably will for some years ahead),

any Government, national, regional or local , should have some tools to target the differences – when measuring out provisions, laws and regulations, economic schemes, projects, programmes, initiatives.

Simply because it will be good for better policies – knowing what reality looks like/ what may effects be for the 2 halves of the populations, and give more accurate use of public money and the possibility to sophisticated accounting.(Of course these exercises can lead to/should lead to redistribution of power)

One of my main messages, as to the issue of a citizen-friendly Europe (as mentioned in the text for today) is that the stakeholders – being the social partners and NGO’s representing users - should have access to and be trained in the same tools, as to make tripartism and social dialogue possible.

This point is actually a clue, a core in modern administration , and lies firmly in the bottom of the socalled "Nordic Model" where tripartism, equality values and ample social welfare systems are essentials!

There should be a gender balance in the social dialogue (among the representatives) when discussing this. The issue concerns/affects both gender; it is not solely a women’s issue – but an equality and human decency issue. It has taken some time to convince the social partners that issues of gender equality also are men's issues.

(Nevertheless, one will sometimes see the need to develop affirmative actions for one of the genders: Norwegian examples: Quotas for women in the board rooms of large private public LTDs and promoting men in kindergartens/pre-school teachers colleges; Iceland's 3 month's non-transferable fathers quota in their Parental leave Scheme )

The goals are certainly not to develop specific GE-fields with specific budget lines in itself,

• but to be aware of gender aspects (and age) in actual fields/policy areas where there most certainly are such aspects,

• and secure that due and honest statistical and other analyses are done. Be sure to have a standing panel /group of gender statistic experts in your Central Bureaus of Statistics, who can serve your needs at any time – on macro-and micro levels. This is costly at the start, but pays of in the long run, as part of cost-conscious administration

• To secure that social differences between genders are not increasing when reforms/policies are implemented

• and design a social dialogue / empower tripartism, on basis of the statistical findings and analyses of factuality; do the social partners agree upon the description ? (experiences from Norway)

The constitutional practise of GB is not unlike doing the environmental assessment excersise. One asks: What kind of environmental aspects are there in this programme, project, research or law or regulation ? What could be effects on what part of the environment of this or that technology used for instance by petroleum companies (very relevant in Norway)?

When doing GB one has to be aware of that sometimes dry statistical analyses will reveal conditions that a modern democratic society simply has to address – fast – as to move ahead, not the least to boost the economy ! (refer: Goldman and Sachs study of April 2007 on closing the Employment Gap will boost the GNP)

Gender sensitive budgets , as environmental assessment , can sometimes pave the way for political frog-leaps that is good for economy and is good governance as well:
(Ex.The recent German Eltern Geld, providing for parental leave as to enhance women’s/mothers access to work and careers, men and fathers possibility to combine work and family life, and hopefully to raise the fertility rate.

The recent German agreement upon the Kindertagesbetreuung, increasing public spending to early child care; affecting both men and women and strongly increasing the possibility for both gender to reconcile work and family life).
 
Norwegian Laws and regulations on Parental leave and other Parental Rights, have evolved very positively since 1957 to 2007 –as a result of Gender Analyses , in Govt. as well as within the framework of the Tripartite Cooperation.

The need to enhance women’s access to the labour force (market pull for labour is there, but obviously some state intervention is needed), fathers rights/duties to care for family and children are addressed and measures taken; in all the Nordic Countries due to gender analytical work.

Research and statistics and social dialogue have been in the bottom of very successful policies in all the Nordic Countries.

In Norway 70 % of women work, more than 90 % of fathers take their 6 weeks non-transferable leave (quota), fertility rate is 1.9 (2006).Norwegian economy is booming, ILO conventions no.156 is adequately observed.

We understand more fully, due to GB-analyses, that equal pay (pr.hour) for work of equal value will benefit the imperfections of the labour-market as will more equality between spouses in parental rights, and fostering caring masculinities.

Women working part-time (and with fractions of jobs) is a puzzle and a challenge; now when we (in Norway) need massive recruiting to the care of elderly and, having soon full coverage of kindergarten places, need pre-school teachers. (Immigrant labour might be the solution, if not the women working part-time chooses full-day, which will be easier with full coverage of kindergartens for the youngest children and may be amend the Parental Leave Scheme more like the Icelandic model, to "force" fathers to take more leave than a few weeks and share a substantial part of the Parental leave year with the mothers. 82 % of mothers with small children work in Norway, but alas – part-time 40 %)

Let us be very down-to-earth, sober , analytical and practical in this; not alienating stakeholders or budget-conservative circles with new and difficult wording or secterist behaviour: Gender Budgetting is simply a solid, good governing tool, to be used within ordinary, traditional budget procedures. It can only make these more accurate.

Thank you.