Dr. Se?n Healy:

The Chairman has asked critical questions that need to be addressed. We have dealt with some very important issues for a budget in the first two hours of this meeting but these issues are also important.

The financial climate is volatile.

The sources of income, particularly in corporation tax, are volatile. As we have discussed, corporation tax revenue could fall dramatically. We do not want to be inflationary.

Let us take the last piece first. People who are in receipt of core welfare rates or on low pay or the minimum wage are not spending their money on luxuries. Their income is only of a level that barely allows them to survive. It does not even provide a decent standard of living or a minimally adequate standard of living. Many people do not have an income per hour equivalent to the living wage. We have a situation where people are on the margin. Their money stays locally. There is not any great danger that our proposal would cause inflation through more expenditure on luxury goods, imports or whatever the issue may be.

With regard to volatility, at the end of the day, we are left with choices to be made on a budget. We have the idea of an overall contribution that goes to everybody in society - universal grants in various areas. These payments could have been targeted, although maybe not the first time around because they were made in a hurry. However, there was plenty of time afterwards to work out how that money could be awarded in such a way that there would not be an overall net increase. At least part of the money that went to wealthy people who did not need it could have gone to poorer people who were basically having to make choices between food and heat. That has been documented endlessly.

On top of that, we must face something else. It was very well summarised by the Parliamentary Budget Office's, PBO, analysis of the budget. It is a very good analysis. Social Justice Ireland had made a similar point regarding the €12 increase but I will cite the PBO in this case because it is probably better to quote another entity, particularly when it is one that is close to the committee and gives it a lot of information. The analysis stated:

This €12 increase represents a 5.8% increase in 2023 [so, yes, there was an increase] and combined with the €5 increase last year, will result in an 8.4% increase since 2021. However, accounting for inflation, in real terms the rate will fall 1.2% in 2023 and will have fallen 6.7% since 2021 in terms of their purchasing power. To keep pace with inflation over 2022 and 2023, the rate would need to be €235.89.

That is almost €236.00, which is €16 less than the €220 people will get. We are asking for only half of that €16 figure or €8. I do not know how to communicate this to people who have the power to make the difference, all of whom are on six-figure salaries. It is very difficult to explain to people what it means to live on €220 a week, how desperate people are who are in that space and how wrong it is to tease them by giving them a very welcome double week here and a double week there or whatever. People will not say "No" to that but that is not the way to deal humanely with them.