Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I add my voice to those of others who have objected to this proposal to cut the respite care grant, which is probably one of the most mean-spirited aspects of the budget. We are all fed up listening to representatives of the Government speak about the budget. Those to whom I refer stated - prior to its introduction - that the budget would be tough but fair and they continue to say this. As the Minister is well aware, the budget is nothing like fair. As previous speakers stated, if it had been the case that the Government had no choice but to make these draconian cuts, people would have faced up to the reality involved. The truth is, however, that the Government had several options open to it. For example, it could have increased the universal social charge or introduced a solidarity levy. God knows we need solidarity now more than ever before and if we had introduced a 5% solidarity levy in respect of people with incomes in excess of €100,000 - in the context of the element of those incomes that is above that amount - we could have raised €320 million.

I put it to the Minister that a majority of the Members of this House would favour a solidarity levy. Such a levy was first mooted by a number of Fine Gael backbenchers last year - I believe they still support it - and I am of the view there is widespread support within the Labour Party and across the Opposition benches for such a measure. A levy of this nature is necessary because we need those who are wealthy and who have been fairly well protected from the cold winds of the recession to show solidarity with people who are desperately badly off and really struggling. If a solidarity levy had been introduced, it would have negated the need to bring forward any welfare cuts in the budget. Unfortunately, the Government has chosen to hammer people on low and middle incomes. That was a very definite choice that was made within Government. As already stated, it had options.

The Government could also have tackled the inequalities relating to the pensions regime. Last year it stated that it would do so this year and now this year it is saying that it will perhaps take action next year. That is just not good enough. There is an obvious target in this regard, namely, making the pensions regime much fairer and thereby saving a considerable amount of money. If the Government had done that this year - as should have been the case - it could have raised €250 million and there would not have been a need for any of these awful cuts which are going to place enormous pressure on the poorest people in our country.

The Government had options. In such circumstances, its members should stop saying that the budget is fair. Will the Minister, the Tánaiste and their ministerial colleagues please stop saying that they have protected the vulnerable? They have not done so. They had the option to do it. They could have given effect to that aspiration but they did not do so. They chose instead to leave those in the protected sectors - namely, those who are much better off - alone. Again, these people will not be expected to contribute anything this year. I am already on record as stating that this has something to do with the fact that the 12 or 15 people who drew up the budget behind closed doors are all in receipt of a minimum of €160,000 per year.

They are very much removed from the reality of life for so many families who are struggling. Too often, the respite care grant is regarded as an optional extra for families. For those caring for elderly people or people with disabilities, it enables them to meet the additional costs of providing care such as higher heating bills and the cost of special foods needed. In many cases, it enables them to access the critical therapies required such as speech and language therapy, physiotherapy and occupational therapy, all of which have been run down by the Government.

This is a hard-hearted cut and reprehensible. I do not see how anybody who promised the public that there would be fairness and owes his or her position here to the making of that promise can support a measure such as this. I urge Members who have any sense of decency to reject this proposal.

See this speech in context