Stephen Donnelly (Wicklow, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

The history of regulation from ComReg is atrocious. It may be that we will learn how to regulate better, but I doubt it. I move to the next question I have which is around the balance. There has been a great deal of focus on the €1 billion fiscal space and the €660 million that comes under the Minister's consideration. Less time is given to the other 99% of public spending, which is the business-as-usual aspect of it. I have two questions in this regard. The committee met the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council, IFAC, which provided analysis after our meeting setting out its stand-still forecasts. In other words, this is the increase in spending required by the State to do nothing new. Worryingly, the profile IFAC gave the committee matches almost exactly the projected spending increases. For example, the summer economic statement has projected spending for next year of €54.405 billion.

IFAC says the standstill figure is €54.255 billion. That profile matches right out to 2021. If IFAC is correct - those on the council are a smart bunch who are doing sophisticated analysis - then the entire projected increase in current expenditure for public services, almost down to the last €1,000, for the next five years will be required to do nothing. As I am sure the Minister knows, his Department's analysis includes payments under the Lansdowne Road agreement and demographics. IFAC analysis also includes Lansdowne Road and demographics but it includes €700 million more under demographics. IFAC analysis also includes an index-linking of social protection payments over a five-year period at very modest inflation, which is not an unreasonable assumption to make. The other item included is public service wage inflation, which is pitched just at the rate of inflation. The council's standstill position has zero real increases in wages or social protection payments but, almost to the euro, the analysis it presented to this committee indicates that just doing that will require everything we have.

My second question is related to the first and concerns balance. My view is that we are not spending enough on the arts. If we are only spending one sixth of the European average, then clearly that is unreasonable. The question the Minister posed is reasonable, namely, if we want to give €200 million to the arts or to reach the European average, where do we cut? Education does not have enough funding. There has been asset-stripping at third level according to one university president. Health care is an obvious area where we are not getting value for money. Our health care system is clearly sick. We voted through €500 million this year, with very little analysis. We voted through over €600 million towards the end of last year. The Minister himself pointed out that we have a very young population. Depending on which analysis one looks at, we have either the second or fourth highest spend on health care on Earth. When one adjusts, which departmental officials have done in the expenditure review, for the fact that we are younger and, therefore, healthier, we are completely on our own and outstrip everywhere else, including the US.

There are clearly areas on which we should spend more money, like the arts, education and the voluntary sector, for example. There are also clearly areas where we could almost certainly provide the same level of service for a lot less money, the obvious one being health care. There is always a lot of talk about where more money should be spent. Where does the Minister think less money needs to be spent in order to improve areas such as housing, education, the arts and the voluntary sector?