Dr. Seán Healy:

Before water charges were introduced, a committee here looked at it. We made a presentation and suggested that here should be a very generous water allowance for all households depending on the number of people there and all excess water should be charged for. It sounds familiar, does it not? In fact, it sounded really familiar reading this morning's papers. Most Irish people would be fair about that if the other piece that needed to be put in was there. That piece is serious and substantial investment to deal with leaks and sewage issues that are not being addressed. For us, it is quite clear how we should have proceeded in the first place. The problem was that it got caught up in a whole lot of other stuff that did not necessarily have a great deal to do with water but had to do with people suffering with too much austerity, which I have already talked about. Some of the pressure for that, at least, came from outside the country.

On public sector pay, we are very aware of the fact that any increase in public sector pay, not just this coming year, but any time, involves a choice about resources. Obviously, people need to be paid the going rate for the job, whatever that happens to be, but in times of scarce resources choices have to be made between infrastructure, services, pay and a range of other issues. We suggest very strongly that all sectors of society should be engaged in that process. Formerly, we had a process for doing that in social partnership, which was perhaps imperfect albeit not as bad as it is sometimes portrayed to be. I am not saying we should go back to social partnership as it was, but I am saying that unless we involve all sectors of society in the decision making this requires, parts of society will not support the decisions and one will wind up to the broken approach to development that we see in politics in Britain, the USA and, possibly, other European countries.

The only thing I said in the public arena at the Brexit forum organised by the Taoiseach was that I was interested in, supported and welcomed the fact that there was a great deal of focus on the consequences of Brexit. Until I stood up and made the point, however, there was not one comment on the causes of Brexit. Unless we deal with the causes of Brexit, that type of thing will come again from another country in another space. It could even happen in Ireland. The issues that have to be addressed in that context are very close to the issues that have to be addressed when choices are made with relatively scarce resources between pay and tax and tax cuts and infrastructure and service development.

Certainly, we need a conversation on the cost of universal services. The numbers we have looked at very closely over a long time suggest we can deliver universal services and infrastructure at a level that is at the European average but for slightly less than the European average tax take. However, we cannot do it for as little as we have at the moment. Deputy Chambers said it did not feel like we were a low-tax country. I accept that a lot of people feel that way. It is partly due to a certain kind of socialisation into the idea that we are high-tax country. It is never presented that tax is a contribution we make as citizens to the development of our own infrastructure, services, protection and all the rest of it. If we compare ourselves to the Nordic countries, they take 50% of our tax take again on top of what we have. They have no issue about it and cutting it is not in issue no matter who is in government because they deliver services and infrastructure. People see it and want it to be in place.

Does Ms Murphy want to refer to the issue about under-25s?