Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)

We should move on with our deliberations because it is clear the Minister has set his face against the concept of a sunset clause. There are other important matters to be discussed. However, this is also an important matter in the sense that pickets will be placed on Leinster House tomorrow morning. Gardaí demonstrated outside the gates to the complex earlier today and the civil and public service unions have balloted their members in respect of strike action. All of this is a result of the disaffection felt by public servants in the context of their being singled out and in respect of the unfairness of this measure. It would do a great deal to allay their fears if instead of adhering to the traditional review mechanism, the Minister were to state the levy will only be imposed for a defined period.

If this is an emergency measure, it ought to apply for a defined period only. The signal the Minister is sending by not accepting these amendments is that the levy may well remain in place. As I argued, most thinking people will state it will be subsumed into a reform of the taxation system when the next budget is presented to the House. In the light of the scale of the problems relating to the public finances, we can anticipate serious changes in the tax code. Most presume that, in a progressive way, those who can afford to pay will pay most under those taxation changes and that the latter will absorb and replace the measures presented here. In such circumstances, the inclusion of a sunset clause would seem reasonable and would do much to allay the division in society which has led to public servants being of the view that they have been unfairly singled out. If the Minister at least stated the levy will apply for the duration of the crisis only, many — perhaps even a majority — of those public servants would be prepared to grin and bear it for that limited period.

See this speech in context