Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Wednesday, 30 May 2018

Committee on Budgetary Oversight

Ireland Country Report and Country-Specific Recommendations: European Commission

2:00 pm

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

I thank our guests for their presentation.

On the Brexit issue, Mr. Martínez Mongay stated that Ireland is at the centre of the Commission's concerns in this matter. I am a little sceptical that this is part of a political blame game the Commission is playing about Brexit and the decision by a member state to leave the European Union, in other words, that the Commission wants to send a warning signal to any other member state that might choose to go down the same road. Let us say I am wrong and my scepticism is unjustified. The position of people here, clearly articulated by the Opposition and the Government, is not only that we do not want a hard border but we will not accept one. Much of the focus has been on whether Britain, despite the so-called backstop, might try to wriggle its way out of that commitment and have a hard border of sorts through another name. We will not accept that. There will be resistance if there is an attempt to impose a hard border. Will Mr. Martínez Mongay provide an assurance that if the negotiations with the EU do not work out, the Commission will not insist on some sort of border by another name in order to protect the integrity of the European market? In the same way that Irish people have no intention of accepting hard borders imposed by Britain, they have no intention of accepting from the European side a demand to impose hard borders or any other kind of border to protect markets or anything else.

I would like a comment on that.

Mr. Martínez Mongay is correct to identify huge infrastructural deficits in housing, health and childcare. We could add water infrastructure, which is a huge area, to that. We might not have such infrastructure deficits if the European Union had not imposed such cruel austerity in the aftermath of the banking collapse. Setting that aside, as Deputy Jonathan O'Brien said, it seems a little odd to identify the need for urgent investment in these areas to essentially buffer our economy, diversify our economy, prepare it for possible external shocks and so on, and then say we should put a load of money into a rainy day fund, which effectively means investing in bonds, the international markets, etc., rather than investing in these key areas of education, housing, health or childcare. Such investment would buffer the people and the economy against external shocks, rather than essentially depending on the vagaries of the financial markets. If there are further financial shocks, rainy day funds based on that could evaporate quickly. We should not set aside on a rainy day fund. We should invest in areas that would genuinely enhance the strength and infrastructure of the economy to provide a meaningful buffer against further external shocks and over-reliance on certain sectors, which Mr. Martínez Mongay rightly identifies.

I have a question regarding the windfall gains. I do not agree that they should be put against debt but they should not just be squandered on pointless expenditure. They should also be diverted into meaningful capital investment and infrastructural development in education and so on to build up the skills base to which he referred. Would he include in those windfall gains the €13 billion that Europe has said we should collect in taxes from Apple. Does he think it is folly in the extreme for the Government to legally resist the collection of that money rather than use it for investment?

I agree with the Mr. Martínez Mongay on tax reliefs but I would like him to elaborate because there is massive over-reliance on tax reliefs. Whatever economic benefit we might get from them now, that could evaporate, because, in many cases, they are not strengthening the underlying domestic economy. The benefit is going in many cases to multinationals. Could he elaborate on what is meant by shifting from tax reliefs? One of our major corporate tax reliefs is research and development, mostly benefitting large multinational corporations. Does he mean that expenditure should instead go into universities, third level education and so on?

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.