Mr. Shay Cody:

We took it on the chin when it was abolished. We would not be here if we did not have the financial crisis because it would have continued.

That is the practical reality of the matter. We did not press the issue at all in the dark days on the grounds of the trade union's social responsibility, unlike others who went in the back door and in effect saved the relief for themselves. We just chose to resurrect the issue when there were options as far as State expenditure was concerned. Is this more important than houses or health? No, it is not, but it is an irritation because people feel a sense of grievance about the fact that we took it on the chin and no one else in society did so in a similar set of circumstances. Now that we are back to there being budget equilibrium, perhaps budget surpluses, we believe the €26 million practical cost of this, in the overall scheme of things, is probably worth more psychologically to trade union members than the overall €50 billion, €60 billion or €70 billion State budgets. We see it as an issue of fairness. It will not break the bank, and we have been patient about it because we did not believe it was an appropriate matter to be here talking to the committee about in the hard times. However, we are in a different situation now, and this is due in part to the sacrifices made and the retrenchments and difficult decisions taken by tens of thousands of members of our union and many others in those difficult times.