Pearse Doherty (Donegal South West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I presume the tax credit can be claimed retrospectively for four years, as is the case with other tax credits. Perhaps this part of the debate will not be broadcast on "Oireachtas Report". As the Minister of State noted, the legislation is so open-ended that one only needs to care for a child for a portion of a day to be eligible to claim this tax credit. Will this mean that we will have a flood of retrospective applications for the tax credit from single parents who, as Deputy Broughan noted, account for 34% of families? A tax credit of €2,500 for each of the past four years would mean that people would get ten grand from the Revenue Commissioners before Christmas. What damage would that do to the €22 million in savings the Government expects to secure?

I could provide different options for generating savings of €22 million. To paraphrase the response of the Minister for Finance when he was questioned about the €3 million loss to the State arising from a mistake made in the local property tax legislation, pluses and minuses are built into every budget. The Government can make a commencement order and if corporation tax revenues are €22 million below target, it will still have scope to make up the shortfall. Governments will always try to define the parameters of the budget in advance. The money generated from Bank of Ireland's sale of a preference share today will be recouped by the National Pensions Reserve Fund, from which the original investment in the bank originated. As a result, the State will lose out as it will no longer receive part of the dividend to the Exchequer that is paid by Bank of Ireland every February. As this example makes clear, issues always arise in terms of the pluses and minuses in a budget.

If the Government genuinely did not want to target single parents, specifically single fathers, for savings of €2,500 per annum, it would find a way around this measure. Based on comments made by the Minister for Finance in committee last week, I entertained the hope he was open to change on this proposal. While the Minister of State may argue that this measure is better than the proposal made by the Commission on Taxation, it is still not a good one. He should explain to single fathers who pay maintenance, provide love, care, protection and support for their children and play a valuable role in their upbringing why losing €220 per month is better than the proposal made by the commission because that argument does not cut it.

The proposal is wrong. As Deputy Róisín Shortall pointed out, if it was presented in its true guise, namely, as a measure to remove €220 per month from single fathers, it would cause outrage. The numbers involved are small and many of those who are entitled to the credit do not claim it. While there may also be others who should not have claimed it because they had not provided for their children or did not engage with them, we should not throw out the baby with the bath water. There are more sensible approaches to reforming the current system. The proposed measure is cruel to parents and, more importantly, their children.

Separated parents incur additional costs in providing for their children as there will be two homes and essentially two families. Having one tax credit for the child is not how the system should operate.

See this speech in context