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

No, I am just stating the obvious.

Some of us believe in the concept of universal provision. Before throwing stones about populism and being electoral, the Minister should look to Fine Gael and the initiative taken by it to cover its back in respect of the nastier cuts it directed towards people with discretionary medical cards or the elderly from whom they are being withdrawn.

On the universal social charge and where the tax burden falls, while the Minister has stated the Government's position, it is worth putting indicating that at a minimum people earning the minimum wage or less should not have to suffer the impact of the universal social charge which it should be remembered was the defining austerity tax introduced as a result of the crash and decision to bail out the banks. The idea that those on the minimum wage, a miserable wage for people on which to survive, should not be subject to this austerity tax is the minimum ask. Some of us would go a lot further. We proposed in our last two budget submissions that persons earning less than €60,000 be exempted from the USC and that those earning between €60,000 and €100,000 be liable to pay at only half the rate which, according to the Department, would cost in the region of €2 billion. We proposed that this cost be met by an increase in income tax rates on earnings over €100,000, €150,000 and €200,000. This proposal is dismissed pretty much out of hand by the Minister and the political establishment. I put it to him that such a proposal is fair. Tax collection should be about the fair distribution of income and resources. There is an ever growing gap between high and low earners and between the rich and the poor. It seems a progressive budget would seek to close this gap and redistribute wealth in a fair way, in part because this would be fair and also because it would be better for the economy. Numerous studies and analyses show that more equal societies function better.

That is something the Minister does not seem to get. He is not acknowledging the point of a gap between rich and poor, with huge differentials between top and low earners. That is unfair and corrosive to society and social solidarity. Ultimately, there is a cost, and issues such as the universal social charge have worsened the position of the less well-off.

There is also the matter of economic growth. Relieving the burden of taxation in the form of the universal social charge on low and middle income earners would have a far greater benefit for the economy than the approach which the Minister generally seems to favour of giving tax breaks to big corporations or high earners on the grounds that he believes this will incentivise investment. There is not much evidence that there is any success in this regard, and it is surely self-evident that if the income of those on low and middle incomes is increased, the multiplier effect would be far greater for the economy, as these people will spend the money in local shops and businesses. For the most part the money would not go outside the country or be used for speculative purposes; it will benefit the economy and generate demand, growth and employment. The Minister does not really seem to acknowledge or understand that in how the budgets are framed and persists with policies of trying to incentivise the rich and maintain the burden of austerity on low and middle income families. That is why the economy is not recovering and we are not getting the promised economic growth.