Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

I want to set the scene for the points with which I disagree. On the pensions issue, the witnesses have hit on something important. They are right that 80% of the benefit going to 20% of the people is problematic and we need to deal with that but why would they not go a little further? Some €2.5 billion is given in tax reliefs and most of that goes to the top 20%. Why would they not go considerably further and argue - I think Vincent Browne argued this point a while ago - for eliminating almost all of that relief and have universal provision of the non-contributory pension at double its current level? We could afford that if most of those reliefs were eliminated and the private pension system was phased out. Why would the witnesses not take that more radical route?

On the property tax issue, the witnesses should rethink what they have proposed because they are the good guys but I believe they have got it totally wrong on this issue. The rate they propose of 0.35% would amount to a property tax of €700 a year on a house valued at €200,000. People who are not rich live in many areas Dublin where properties have high values and under that scenario they would have to pay €1,000 in property tax alone. It is of no consolation that the payment of that tax would be deferred until further down the road and people would be accumulating debts. That is an awful scenario. The witnesses should rethink this proposal. Some 70% or 80% of people own their own homes. There is nothing wrong with that and the family home should not be considered as a form of wealth in the same sense as commodities and financial investments. The witnesses' position reminds me of the joke about anarchists: Why do anarchists drink green tea? They drink it because proper tea is theft.