Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent) | Oireachtas source

On the day on which this Dáil was convened, it was repeatedly stated that the Government - which has a large majority - does not have a monopoly on wisdom. I took this as quite a hopeful sign. Unfortunately, however, the Government has been engaging in a retrenchment exercise. I find myself continually trying to decipher the language used by those in government. The words used have one meaning in these Houses and quite another in the outside world. I have identified seven or eight words or terms which underpin what I am trying to say. The language to which I refer is that of political survival. It is not the language that is used by those who wish to provide people with the type of honest leadership they need. It will be a major failing on the part of the Government if it cannot convince the people to trust it. One cannot lead people if they do not trust one.

It has been stated on many occasions that the Government will protect "vulnerable people". How does the Minister define the word "vulnerable"? This word does not signify the reality we witness on a daily basis. I refer here to people who are having their home help services, their domiciliary care payments and their access to the services of special needs assistants cut. It is in this context that one begins to see the effects of what is being done.

Last year the Minister for Social Protection stated that headline rates of social welfare payments would be "protected". When she convened a particular group this year, it was evident that the Minister had lost people's trust.

They asked what she meant by "core rates". They knew that "headline rates" did not mean what they thought it meant last year. People who do not engage with the social protection system do not realise that, for instance, a person denied a domiciliary care allowance is suffering a cut of 100% in their income; the reduction in child benefit payment for the third child is a cut in income; and a disregard for lone parent benefit is a cut. The rent supplement payment reduction will not save money but it will have a very real impact in places where the market rates are significantly higher than the level of rent supplement and this means that people will be displaced.

People are beginning to question and to disbelieve. They ask what the word "special" means. They are starting to disbelieve the language of this Dáil and of the Government. Does front-line staff mean occupational speech therapists or special needs assistants? Does it mean there is a doctor available but no ambulance to take a patient to the doctor?

Reform only means reductionism and a box-ticking exercise. People want to see things done in a smart way rather than cost savings being the ultimate choice. Why can the Minister not say that something is unsustainable? We know the numbers and neither we nor the people are fools. The Government would gain more credibility by talking the language people understand. For instance, we are told we are all making sacrifices. A sacrifice is a voluntary choice, not something imposed on an individual. In my view, we need to make sacrifices in the political sphere. I refer to the money allocated to the political system and we need change to happen in a timely manner. Unvouched expenses are no longer acceptable and I have said this on numerous occasions.

We met the troika last week. When we challenged the head of mission about his views expressed at a conference, he replied that he had made a point of saying that the most vulnerable had to be protected and he took issue with the manner in which his views were reported in a newspaper. When the troika was challenged on the fact that one in ten people is subject to food poverty, he said there was sufficient money in this country and this poverty should not be occurring. He referred to Fiona Muldoon and her engagement with the banks. We all want to see more done in that regard. Fair play to a person who says it like it is because this is always welcome.

The Government does not have a monopoly on wisdom. I refer to Social Justice Ireland's well thought-out policy document. I do not agree with all the arguments in that document but I agree with some of the points. For instance, I agree with short-term measures being bad in the longer term. We must remember that society as well as the economy needs to be protected and preserved. TASC is a think-tank on action for social change. I asked it to prepare a document on initiatives for job-rich growth and how funding might be sourced for those initiatives. I refer to the National Pensions Reserve Fund, NPRF. I am not talking about throwing money at issues as a form of stimulus. I acknowledge we have to see a return for our money. The NPRF has to be repaid in order to protect future pensions. Actions can be taken which will generate a great deal of hope. I refer, for instance, to a recent document from the Irish Congress of Trade Unions which contains some excellent ideas. Organisations are making the effort to find solutions. For instance, there is a suggestion that the two thirds, one third breakdown is fundamentally damaging to our society because of the impact on the most vulnerable. I favour a progressive wealth tax and a higher level of taxation for those earning over €100,000. Like many others, I believe this could garner in the region of €50 million. Services such as home help, SNAs, occupational or speech therapy have a longer-term consequence in people's lives. Every avenue should be explored for bringing in additional funds.

Confidence is the language of the market but in my view, people crave the language of society which is the language of hope. Unless we see an end to the paralysis and give some hope, I do not think confidence will return. It is a question of this Government seeing beyond itself and returning to what it said on its first day in office, that it does not have a monopoly on wisdom. There are plenty of people who would appreciate and understand that the Government is in a very difficult position but it will not be solved without us all being in it together. There needs to be some fairness and equality.

See this speech in context