Aideen Hayden (Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank both organisations for their presentations and for the documentation they provided, which is very informative. In particular, I compliment Social Justice Ireland for the excellent briefing material it provided.

Starting with TASC, I note that it is proposing an investment of €1.5 billion but it does not go into detail on how it sees that money being invested.

I am thinking in particular about how we might stimulate the domestic economy. We need to ring-fence that investment in order that it benefits the domestic economy. In this context, I am mindful that the percentage of the economy accounted for by the construction sector has decreased from 20% to 5%.

I have noted TASC's proposal with regard to social insurance costs. TASC accepts that this is neither the time nor the place to do anything in this area that might have a negative impact on employment. I wonder whether its representatives have considered a timeframe in that respect.

I would like to refer to the specific proposals made on page 4 of the TASC document. TASC has proposed a reduction from 75% to 40% in the proportion of mortgage interest relief that can be claimed in the case of rental properties. When this measure was withdrawn completely during the 1990s, it had a very negative effect on properties available to rent and the market generally. I wonder whether TASC has considered the possible impact on the availability of property to rent and the housing market generally of the fact that some 30,000 of the country's 150,000 buy-to-let properties are in mortgage arrears for more than 90 days.

I would like to comment on TASC's proposal with regard to capital acquisitions tax. I note that capital gains tax has not been included in the proposal. I wonder why an increase from 33% to 35% has been proposed, rather than providing for all of this income - earned and unearned - to be taxed at the same rate.

I am trying to be as quick as I can. I note that Fr. Healy has proposed that we stimulate the economy. I think we were all cheering him on when he said austerity did not represent the way forward. He has suggested an investment of €500 million could come from the savings on the promissory notes. Would he be in favour of an even higher level of investment? In his initial presentation he mentioned that his group was proposing an increase in expenditure of just €50 million in the social housing area. Focus Ireland, for example, is arguing in favour of a €400 million investment. I do not think the €50 million investment proposed would make a substantial impact on the 100,000 households actually on housing waiting lists.

I echo Deputy Pearse Doherty's concerns with regard to the bad nutrition tax. It is pretty well accepted that poorer families are more likely to consume poor food. I appreciate that our guests are proposing that the moneys saved go directly into the health system. Would they suggest the money be ring-fenced for school meals, for example? If that were done, it would not be a savings measure per se. Instead, it would be an investment in our children's futures.

I have a slight reservation about the proposed text tax purely from the point of view that texting is the method of communication of many young people. I know a young person who sends at least 150 text messages a day. It could be a little ageist, to say the least, as a proposed taxation measure.