Barry Cowen (Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the various groups for coming in and for their presentations. Some were very specific and others were quite broad. It is coming near to the time where we have to be much more specific, especially when one sees the statement made by the Minister for Finance today. It behoves us all to look at the realities that exist and make recommendations based on the realities that we can work within. We also have to be mindful that we are talking about a budget for 2019. We are not necessarily talking about the next five or ten years, or anything like that. When one looks at the specifics and hears what the witnesses have been saying, it boils down to three things. Those are: housing; the cost of living and the cost of business, particularly with regard to insurance and housing and its impact on the ability to generate jobs, especially in cities where costs are exorbitant; and the area of infrastructure. Looking at what is available and how we address those issues, if one compares and contrasts what was envisaged last year, it was €3.2 billion, while the Minister talked about €3.4 billion today. It is really €3.9 billion, because €500 million is a given for the rainy day fund, something that we stitched into our agreement with the Government, and it is not up for discussion, as far as we are concerned. Thereafter, the Minister talks about €2.6 billion already being committed. That is made up of €1.5 billion for the national development plan, €400 million for demographics, €400 million for public pay and €300 million as a carryover. We are now at €2.6 billion.

The witnesses, my constituents, those in my party and I need to know about the €1.5 billion committed to the national development plan in 2019. Where, specifically, is that being spent and what, specifically, is that being spent on, so that the witnesses can evaluate whether that is value for money and if it will yield progress in areas in which the witnesses have concerns? We will ask the Minister to elaborate on that in the short term so that the witnesses can evaluate that and make further contributions if necessary. That leaves €800 million, notwithstanding the commitment that has been made at our insistence about the public pay issue for new entrants. That is a €200 million cost in one year. Whether that is agreed between Government and the unions over one, two or three years, we will support that. That is a given. It might well be back to €700 million.

Now we are talking about priorities. Where are the priorities? We all recognise and acknowledge that there is a crisis and emergency in housing. It not only impinges on the poor unfortunates in the midst of that with regard to social and affordable housing, it also impacts on jobs, the ability to attract jobs and to allow people to meet the demands placed upon them. We do not want that transferred to wage demand. We want the Government to address that with regard to the cost of living that the witnesses mentioned. From what ICTU is saying and in response to the questions put to us by others, it is not necessarily an issue whereby one increases the level of funding towards the provision of housing, whether social or affordable. It is how it is spent. It is not being spent wisely or appropriately, and it is not yielding a return. What do the witnesses believe the solution to this is? It is not just throwing more money at it and saying that local authorities will build them. Unfortunately, they are not building them. We believe an agency is needed to attract not only Government funding but private funding that can take charge of State lands, build these units and lease them back to local authorities for 100 years. That is the sort of innovation that we want to hear and see rather than more of the same. It is easy for me to say that local government is only spending 20% of what was spent on social housing in 2008 and to increase that by 20% would improve it all of a sudden. It does not. We saw that with health in the past.

To get back to the Dublin Chamber of Commerce, its issue is with infrastructure and improving the atmosphere in which business can flourish, and how development and specific spending on the capital side can improve that, whether on the Luas in Dublin or public transport issues in less populated areas, how that is improved and how business in those areas can improve. One cannot be in a qualified position to make judgment on that until provision for the extra spending in the development plan is qualified and quantified. Have the witnesses any specific proposals? I welcome what is being said about insurance costs and the concrete proposals put before us. We would like to see more of that. My colleague asked a question with regard to ICTU. Start prioritising. We would all like to see improvements that I hope will happen over time but, with regard to the 2019 budget, we have a job to do in this committee, and thankfully it is being done in an open and transparent manner and people can see that nothing is going on behind closed doors, so do not be afraid of making firm, concrete proposals that we can analyse.