Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)

I will focus on two aspects of this group of proposals. Like the Fine Gael Party, the Labour Party proposed the abolition of the air travel tax. While I acknowledge that the Government has made a move in that direction by reducing the tax and has applied some conditionality to its application, this is one of the taxes, the disincentive effect of which is as much the fact that it is in place as it is the level at which it applies. While I understand that when the budget was being framed and calculations were being made, the Minister examined the amount and arrived at the proposal before us, in terms of its impact on passenger numbers and tourism leaving the tax in place means there is still a difficulty.

If the Government was moving in the direction of increasing excise on petrol and diesel, I, like Deputy Coveney, do not understand the reason this was not done by way of the carbon tax or carbon levy. This would have had a more general application than the use of the excise method. While I expected the budget to include an excise package - it is an understandable measure - I am puzzled as to the reason the excise measure is focused on petrol. Why, for example, was the Irish Cancer Society's recommendation on excise on cigarettes not taken up? Why were the various recommendations to increase excise on alcohol for health reasons not taken up? There were expectations and a certain amount of speculation that the budget would include increases on excise in these areas.

Increasing excise on petrol and diesel affects the one area where costs have increased significantly in recent times. Even in recent days, the price of petrol and diesel has increased on the forecourt. Such increases impact directly on working people. The cost of travelling to work, doing business or running a van or vehicle associated with work will increase as a result of this measure. The proposal is misplaced. If excise was to be increased, other options were available. If the Government wanted to focus on carbon, it should have increased the carbon levy.

See this speech in context