Pearse Doherty (Donegal South West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

That dramatic move cost the State approximately €50 million, but the Government introduced another measure that recouped that amount. I am referring to the case of an employee employed by two employers or the like. While the affected individuals saw some value, there would be more substantive value in bringing those earning the minimum wage out of the USC net. The Minister is right, in that a cohort of individuals are part-time workers and entitled to benefits exempt from the USC. However, I am also right in saying a number of those exempt following the Minister's dramatic move because they earn below €10,000 are part-time workers and entitled to social welfare payments which are exempt. That is not a reason not to do this and it is something of which we must be conscious. As the Minister acknowledged, the real argument is about where the line should be drawn and what income should be protected from the USC. There is no point in repeating myself ad nauseam, as there is a difference of opinion, but that will not stop me from trying to pursue this point on the minimum wage of €17,542.

The Minister maintains that his budget has purposely protected the over-70s, but I contest that claim. Let us consider the issue. I cited the example of the Government last night passing legislation that took tens of thousands of medical cards from the over-70s through a reduction in thresholds. It was the result of a budget that demanded that the Minister for Health, Deputy James Reilly, find €666 million in savings. The HSE has stated today that probably twice that amount is necessary. This is the second time that has happened this year. During our debate on the Bill yesterday we dealt with the €1,000 threshold for medical insurance. The budget will affect people who are over 70 years of age. It may be the Minister's €40 or less, but they will be affected.

We also dealt with the one-parent tax credit yesterday. The Minister has acknowledged that grandparents have been receiving the credit if they are the secondary carers, but they will no longer be eligible. Therefore, a cohort of over-70s will be affected. We do not know the numbers because they have not been provided.

The property tax, although not contained within the Finance Bill, formed part of the budgetary arithmetic. The Minister booked the €250 million that would accrue from that tax. Obviously, the over-70s are not exempt from paying its full value and they will see a reduction in their disposable incomes in 2014.

They are the measures we have addressed heretofore. There are others on the spending side that will impact on the over-70s. Are the over-70s deliberately being targeted? Some of the previous measures introduced were very crude, in particular the USC threshold reduction. The measure we discussed last night is targeted at the over-70s. This is not a case of changes to medical card entitlement for everybody, rather it is a reduction in the threshold for medical card entitlement for the over-70s. Countless other measures in the recently announced budget impact on the over-70s. I accept that they also impact on other sections of society. If we had equality proofed budgeting, we would not be having this type of debate. We would instead have an independent assessment of which people were being disproportionately affected, which is the real question.

In terms of the various scenarios I have outlined, in the budget, looked at through the lense of what was introduced in previous budgets by the Government, there has been a particular targeting of the over-70s.