Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)

We need to wake up and smell the coffee. A judge of the High Court has an annual salary of €243,000 according to the remuneration of higher public servants review published by the Minister for Finance last Friday. That is the third highest rate of pay for those public service officeholders examined in the study. It should be borne in mind that other public servants at that level have already taken pay cuts averaging 9%. It is now proposed to implement a further cut of up to 15% to this group's pay. The two highest Secretaries General, in the Department of the Taoiseach and the Department of Finance, have volunteered cuts of 20%.

Some weeks ago the Minister for Finance said we are in a war situation. On last Sunday's "The Week in Politics" he said he did not want to open a war on another front with the public service. The Minister has on two occasions been minded to describe the country's situation as an economic war. In war, everyone must share the burden. We have heard at length from the Minister how low-paid workers such as cleaners will have to put their shoulders to the wheel in the war effort to restore the economy. What about the judges?

It is regrettable judges have to be singled out in this debate. However, it has to be done. There is a remedy to this problem in the legislation which is to make provision for the Judiciary. Distinguished members of the Judiciary have set forward their understanding of the constitutional position regarding their pay. It was framed by de Valera to prevent, correctly, an angry government taking out its revenge on a judge who may make an adverse judgment against it. In today's world of 24-hour media coverage, the provision ensures a judge's decision will not be affected by media pressure. These protections are important for maintaining the independence of the Judiciary. In Italy, for example, there has been an ongoing campaign against reforming anti-corruption judges by certain elements of political life, including high officeholders.

No one wants to see such developments in Ireland. However, there are judges, probably more than 50% of them, willing to shoulder the burden along with their fellow citizens. They are being put in an invidious position of being asked to do nothing while the poorest people in the public service have taken relatively large hits between the pension levy and the further imposition provided for in this legislation.

The Labour Party amendment has been framed, as the Minister of State rather grudgingly acknowledged, to be precisely constitutional to overcome these protections. While I believe it could have gone much further, it has been restrained.

The Minister for Finance, Deputy Brian Lenihan, told us the banks were going to be restrained in the last Finance Act when claiming back tax losses. So far this year, the Government has paid over €1.6 billion in tax refunds, one reason the tax take is down. I discussed this with the Minister for Finance at the time of the emergency budget. The Minister did nothing about it because once again he sought not to disturb a very powerful and positioned group in society - the banks, the financiers and the oligarchs.

I believe most judges are anxious to be full contributors in dealing with our economic difficulties. Whether they are, it is open to the Government to address the issue. The Labour Party is offering a way of positively including judges in this legislation without giving rise to any constitutional issues, as the Minister has acknowledged. It would be better for Irish democracy if the Minister were to accept this amendment as it would make a positive provision for judges offering to take part in the deduction.

It is possible to go further. If a disaffected judge believes the levy and the reduction should not apply to him the same way it applies to a nurse and a teacher, he has the remedy of going to the courts. If he wins in the courts, we will obviously need a constitutional referendum. Everything I read, however, indicates we will not need one. There is a strong judicial opinion in this respect, including the previous case in which the courts found judges were liable for income tax because it applies to citizens.

Why is the Minister pussyfooting around this amendment? This is like the emergency budget - tough on poor people but not on those in the upper echelons. There is a series of exemptions from this legislation ranging from Anglo Irish Bank to the bosses of the semi-State companies, all on over €400,000 a year. The people in the top echelons in a war, to use the Minister's words, are the generals who give leadership. Following on from that, judges are akin to generals. Why are they exempt from this legislation?

Every public servant who serves a judge in court, be they gardaí, clerical officers or tipstaves, will be taking this pay hit on their modest incomes. In common with Deputy Rabbitte, I have received sad letters and e-mails from nurses married to gardaí with two or three children explaining what the hit will mean to their incomes. As they are younger they are taking a further large hit with negative equity in their homes. By the end of next year, when mortgage interest rates go up, they tell me they will be sunk. However, a particular category will be exempted from this hit.

While I do not want to be singling out the judges, the Taoiseach has said we are all in this together. Fianna Fáil's position shows we are not. Certain categories, such as the fat cat bankers who have ruined this country and the bosses of the top semi-State companies, are specifically excluded by Fianna Fáil from this legislation.

See this speech in context