That's a very good question.
If we're going to look at gender-based analysis just as a piece of paper we look at after a decision has been taken—and I've looked at the gender-based analyses of both the 2007 and 2006 budgets—I don't think that's going to be good enough. The comments Dr. Young has made are very important with respect to tax policy. Let's focus on this for a moment, because in some respects it's really the most difficult.
My observation is that to really have good gender-based analysis, you need both of what I would call the spenders and the guardians there together—in other words, you need the tax policy analysts in the Department of Finance and you need the program people in the line department—in some kind of process that's going to examine what the ramifications and what the options are. For a number of the tax policy initiatives—and we have a large number of tax expenditures in the social area and across all other areas—the tendency has not been, in the past, to have a great deal of interaction between the departments and tax policy. It tends to be created largely in the Department of Finance, for a whole set of very significant and important reasons.
If there is one reform we need to take, it is to open up the process in a more fundamental way, so that one can examine what the options are when one wants to undertake a particular initiative and see whether or not there are better ways of doing it: direct expenditure options; the use of credits as opposed to deductions, because then we can avoid some of the upside-down subsidy implications; the use of refundable tax credits, which allow people to receive things who are normally not part of the tax system, whether they be rich or poor, male or female. There is whole set of other options. Direct expenditures can be used quite effectively with regard to that.
I think there's no doubt really, when it comes to tax policy, where the power resides. It resides with the Minister of Finance; our system operates that way. But if there's one thing we need to do in tax policy, it is to ventilate the process and to engage much more in that decision-making process. It tends to be extraordinarily technical, it tends to be left to the experts, and it tends to be dominated in particular by the Department of Finance for a whole set of institutional and important reasons.
If there is one thing that's needed, it is a greater examination of these things by the relevant departments.
For example, examination by HRDC with regard to a whole set of issues involving retirement becomes very important. And on the health issues—we use tax expenditures a great deal in that area—much better interaction across that ministry with the Department of Finance becomes very important in the process. And the ways and means by which we can do this when beginning to look at new budgets and the new initiatives that are undertaken become very important.
As to the broader question of how we do this, with the base of existing tax expenditures or with the base of existing expenditures, that becomes quite another matter. We can discuss that perhaps later in the meeting.