Seán Haughey (Dublin Bay North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome that we are having a discussion on the national reform programme, which is a very useful exercise. The witnesses have raised every controversial issue in the political sphere, such as the broadening of the tax base, the universal social charge, the funding of third-level education and water charges. I will be brief as I know time is running out.

As the witness mentioned, the Irish economy is projected to grow over the coming years. What are the current threats to the global economy? The witnesses mentioned the threat to the international environment in regard to taxation and trade. Are they talking about trade agreements in that context? Brexit and the election of President Trump are manifestations of that. How do the witnesses foresee the trend in global interest rates in terms of Europe, the eurozone and the United States? There is a saying that if the world gets a cold, Ireland will be affected. We are a very open global economy so there is cause for concern in that regard.

I do not think Dr. Morgenroth dealt with the question of why income tax revenue is falling, although he touched on it. Economists are surprised by the fall in revenue. I would welcome his views on that issue.

I was very interested by his comments on the over-education of the workforce. Our national skills strategy in that regard needs to be reviewed. It is difficult to tell people that they are over-educated. If they could not get jobs and so on, in particular during the recession, people went back to further education and training and so on. The witness has dealt with that but it is an interesting point.

In the context of the funding of third-level education and the Cassells report, does the witness favour a particular option? A loans system is being considered. I would be loath to go down that route. Young people have many burdens upon them at this time, some of which have been discussed here today. To put more debt upon them by making them pay for their education would not be politically acceptable. Does the witness favour any particular solution for the funding of third-level education?