Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the witnesses and thank them for their presentation. It represents that part of society which makes a major contribution to the well-being of society in general. It identifies deficiencies - as they have done and have correctly pointed out - and plans for the future by highlighting and flagging the issues that will turn up in the future. In particular, I wish to refer to what is missing. I have mentioned this point previously but I remember speaking at a meeting 15 years ago on the availability of quality housing. Although the availability of quality housing was not an issue in Ireland 15 years ago, those of us were watching the system and what was happening came to the conclusion that a serious problem was arising. It now is evident that the problem is here and is with us and how to resolve it remains the issue. Hopefully, measures are in hand to deal with that in the short term in the first instance and second, in the medium to long term. It requires fairly urgent and remedial action, which hopefully is being taken into account. I wish to reject the suggestion from some quarters - it did not come from the presentation heard today - to the effect that this is a new issue that only appeared in the past two or three years. This is not so, as it has been in the melting pot for the past ten to 12 to 14 years and clearly was there for all who wished to see. However, it was difficult to explain to those who did not wish to see. This always is the case, as the Chairman and I well know from past experience in these areas.

I refer to climate change being an issue.

Climate change is likely to become a more emotive issue in this country. In that regard we must recognise the need to achieve a balance because every so often conclusions are reached without taking into account the entire situation presenting to us. I agree we have to respond to issues to do with climate change, leaving aside the question of global warming, which is an unfortunate reference that has crept into the debate over the years, but in this country we must do that in a variety of ways. I was appalled to hear someone commenting recently that this country's approach to the issue was contradictory. That is not true. We have vital economic interests that must be protected if we do not want our economy to go down the drain, and none of us wants to see that happen. We must find alternative sources of electricity generation as a matter of urgency. It is not possible to separate those two issues. It is not possible, nor is it preferable, to talk about one at the expense of the other. We must recognise the extent to which we will replace traditional generation methods with new methods that are carbon neutral or carbon friendly and address the problem.
The agriculture area in particular is deemed to be a demon, and some suggest that the way to deal with that is to scale down and discontinue the operation. That is not correct and anyone coming to that conclusion is seriously misleading themselves and everyone else. Everything that grows requires carbon in the process, and the resulting emissions are the issue we must address.
In ten to 15 years our cars will be powered by electricity. Otherwise, we will be unable to meet the challenges of the future in regard to climate change. That is a welcome development which we must recognise, but how we generate the electricity is the critical factor. That must be done through means other than fossil fuels. There is no point in pretending we will find some other means to do that. There are no other means to do it. That has been discussed ad infinitumheretofore.
I would have been strongly supportive in a former environment, and I continue to be strongly supportive, of ensuring social justice prevails and that we all recognise the need for social justice and having social justice as a pillar of our society to resolve many issues before they become problems. In that regard, we have had a debate in this country on the taxation of multinational corporations in recent years. Changes have taken place to which we all agreed but we also need to recognise that the remedies proposed for us by those from outside are not necessarily remedies that are readily acceptable or that will necessarily address the problem in the way we would like it addressed. We need to keep that in mind with regard to taxation levels generally.
The debate taking place is that there are those who can afford to pay tax. Everyone recognises that up to 52% of their salary disappears in taxation one way or the other, given the various forms of taxation. We have been behind the European average to some extent in this regard, and the witness stated correctly that we need to be careful how we cross the bridge and move to the area of achieving the same levels as other European countries because they are in somewhat different circumstances to ours to a large extent. They do not all have the same open economy we have, however, and they are not always necessarily affected by the challenges from outside.
We also need to keep in mind that the people on the average industrial wage consider themselves highly taxed at present. The people on €35,000 to €40,000 consider themselves under a great deal of pressure from taxation from all avenues and rightly believe that they will be challenged economically into the future. In terms of a resolution that would impact on them to a great extent, which in theory might sound great, they are not exactly the rich. They are the people who are the backbone of our society and our economy, and we need to keep that in mind.
My last point is on taxation generally. Forty-five per cent of all income tax is paid by 8% of the tax-paying public. As that is increased to 50% the figure is 10% of the tax-paying public, and so on. The group of people who will be affected are at two levels, namely, the average industrial wage level and the next level up. It is the people at those two levels who feel somewhat under threat on the basis that they are at work and believe they are entitled to be rewarded for that work. They fully accept they should pay a fair share of tax but they are concerned the total burden of taxation will be thrust upon them. We recognise that 39% of our total workforce do not pay tax simply because they are not on the wage level that requires taxation. It is sad that that is the case but we have to work ourselves gradually into a position where we can afford to pay for the things we would like to pay for and that we would normally have expected to be able to pay for in the normal course of events.