Mr. Neil McDonnell:

Funnily enough, I do not think there is a huge difference between us. There is a philosophical difference on how one bridges the gap. Let me explain it this way. Funnily enough, when unemployment hit its highest level in 2011 or 2012, the Gini index of inequality was at its best for Ireland. In other words, what it was saying was that in terms of social supports in Ireland, the safety net was good enough that, although 300,000 people lost their jobs, the safety net picked everyone up, and as a result inequality decreased. I was not in this organisation when I made the comment, but I said that it follows that when unemployment starts to fall off again and we come out of recession, the Gini index is unfortunately going to go the wrong way. As more people go above the safety net, by definition perceived inequality decreases.

I have met with the Vincentians and debated with them about what constitutes a living wage. One serious issue I have with the calculation of it is that it is done on the basis of a 39-hour week. I would be much more comfortable with the expression of the living wage as a gross weekly wage rather than as an hourly rate, because one could capture the increase in the hourly living wage this year by working two hours more. That means working 41 hours instead of working 39. That is just a fact.

In the long-term, however, the only way we are going to bridge some of these gaps without being perpetually in disagreement is by breaking down some of the walls between the social support systems and the revenue system. I can the Deputy that people in Dublin are refusing jobs as distribution drivers because they do not want to earn more than €35,000 a year. If they do, they will come off the social housing list. That is a fact. There are people who are insisting on remaining on jobseeker's allowance in order to do that. Again, it is over to the members.