A/HRC/28/59/Add.1 27. Public health expenditure decreased from 7.22 per cent of GDP in 2008 to 6.99 per cent of GDP in 2012, with only a limited shift of health-care costs from public coverage to the pockets of individuals. Private health-care expenditure grew by 13 per cent between 2008 and 2012, but remained moderate and, so far, has not exceeded 19.7 per cent (2010) of total health expenditure. 28. Measured as a percentage of GDP, overall public education expenditure was only moderately reduced, while private expenditure for education increased by about 12 per cent after the banking collapse. 29. As the economy contracted by about 8 per cent between 2008 and 2010, it should be noted that, in real terms, painful cuts were made to public health services and education. Compared to 2007 expenditure, funds spent in 2013 on public health care and education were 7.2 per cent and 8.3 per cent lower, respectively (see table 1). Most of the cuts in the health sector, however, were made strategically, focusing on decreasing hospital costs, postponing investments in hospital infrastructure and the acquisition of new equipment, and reducing pharmaceutical costs. Outpatient services were largely spared cuts. In the education field, primary schools were hardest hit by cuts, while pre-primary and tertiary education institutions suffered less. 30. The sharp increase in government spending in 2008, compared to 2007, reflects the cost of recapitalizing the Central Bank of Iceland and the new, downsized domestic branches of Icelandic banks (see table 1, Economic affairs). By 2013, overall government spending had returned roughly to pre-crisis levels. However, the State had to borrow to cover the costs of the banking collapse, which resulted in the significant increase in public debt service, the main reason for the growth in overall spending on general public services, as debt service is currently responsible for about 60 per cent of the expenditure under this category. In 2013, debt service accounted for 11.1 per cent of all State expenditure, which meant that, compared to the pre-crisis years, fewer funds were available to cover other public costs. 31. Spending on public order, safety and justice was reduced only slightly (by 2.4 per cent), while cuts were strongest in the area of road, water and air transportation infrastructure (by 48.6 per cent). It should be noted that the executive and legislative branches also made efforts to save costs. 32. Social protection spending peaked during the period from 2009 to 2012 when Iceland witnessed historically unprecedented rates of unemployment. Funds for rental subsidies and to combat social exclusion were also augmented. Government spending on disability pensions grew, owing to the increase in beneficiaries. Public expenditure on old age pensions also registered an upward trend after 2011. Only spending on family and child benefits was reduced as stricter income-based eligibility criteria for accessing benefits were imposed. 33. It was not only the smart and more targeted use of funds that ensured that core social and economic rights remained protected, but also the willingness of society — in particular the overwhelmingly female workforce in the health and education sectors — to work overtime, accept a salary freeze and use resources more efficiently. As the Working Group on the issue of discrimination against women in law and practice has stressed, such gender imbalances caused by the financial crisis in Iceland need to be corrected (see A/HRC/26/39/Add.1). 34. Welfare Watch, one of the new innovative bodies formed in early 2009, is an independent consultative body, comprising more than 35 representatives of key ministries, municipalities, social partners and civil society, many of whom are also working at the grass-roots level. Welfare Watch was established to monitor the social impact of the crisis, provide advice to State institutions and coordinate targeted interventions on the ground; it 12