Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

It is a very interesting discussion. I wish to pick up on the discussion of previous fiscal rules. Mr. Barnes mentioned the one-twentieth rule and how poorly thought-out it was. I am concerned that there is not a sufficient evolution from the previous fiscal rules. Regarding consequences, I think Mr. Barnes mentioned the lack of enforceabilty and compliance but the consequences have been quite severe societally, politically and environmentally in terms of the fiscal rules. For example, almost a decade was lost in many areas such as climate and long-term investments because of the focus on the short-term rules. Housing was mentioned; perhaps the witnesses can confirm the following. A strong rationale given consistently regarding decisions for the State to engage in long-term leasing of houses rather than construction of housing was the fiscal rules and trying to ensure we were meeting the annual targets, rather than front-loading investment. I am concerned about the impact of these rules on public investment and that the 60% and 3% rules will still be involved, which I know cannot be moved, but not enough seems to have been done to work around them. Is it correct that only six countries meet the 3% target and a majority of countries in the EU do not meet the 60% target? I think that is the case at the moment.