Kevin Humphreys (Dublin South East, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Murphy for putting the Bill before the House. I have not been able to follow all of this interesting debate because the finance committee is meeting this morning.

Making this type of information available to citizens will enable us to have a proper debate. In recent weeks I have met various groups and individuals regarding the budget. I have talked to them about the size of the pie and how we divide it, and I have asked them for their input. Usually, when one meets such groups or citizens, they generally ask one not to allow a cut to take place in their particular area of interest. One must explain that if we do not make a saving or increase the spending in that area, we will have to decrease our expenditure elsewhere. I then ask them where they would make the saving or increase the spending.

I had a very interesting debate with pupils from one of my local schools when they visited the House. We discussed education and examined the savings in the education budget last year and especially the cut or rebalancing where career guidance teachers were concerned. I explained the finance and the Government's position and had a very informed debate with the 16 year old young ladies. They could see the decisions that had to be made by their elected politicians and bought into the process. At the end of the discussion, one of the teachers stood up and said we should not have made any savings in the career guidance area. I explained the pie to the teacher and the pupils, that is, how much we had and the areas where it had to be spent. A young lady stuck her hand up and said she had another question, not for me but for her teacher. She asked the teacher where she would have made the cuts and where she would have spent the money, given that they had spent a half hour hearing it explained. "Give us the alternative viewpoint", she said. The teacher said she would not have made them in education. The young lady said, "That is a bit of a cop out, Miss". I told the pupil not to be too concerned about her Christmas marks, although I do not think they will be very good.

I found this encouraging and enlightening. That 16 year old young lady was able to understand the decisions that are being made in this House. When we put it in a factual way, a 16 year old can see the choices and difficulties we have. Many sectors in society only see their limited areas. Deputy Murphy pointed to the individual earning €42,000 and split up how much each area gets. That transparency is excellent, but we must be careful how we do it. The environment is a good example but, as was said earlier, there will be expenditure of taxation through local government and that must be explained.

Deputy Murphy covered the issue well in his speech. The only concern is the resources required for implementation. The Deputy has offered a solution by referring to an on-line process or an app in this area. There is a way that could be managed. We currently post out the P21 and we could include in it information on how one can see the breakdown of how taxation is spent. To refer back to those 16 year old young ladies, they understood when it was explained to them. I believe the vast majority of taxpayers will also understand. They want a society that functions. It would also be an ideal way to focus on some of the waste that is taking place.

I wish to refer to the €5,000 threshold for publishing expenditure. That figure should be our target. However, it should be an incremental process. In the first year it could be €15,000, €10,000 in the second year and €5,000 in the third year. That would allow the systems to get up to speed to achieve this.

I welcome the Minister's speech and I thank Deputy Murphy for facilitating this debate. I apologise for being unable to follow it in detail and if I have repeated what others have said, it is because I had to attend the finance committee meeting.

See this speech in context