Michael Colreavy (Sligo-North Leitrim, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

The Minister, Deputy White, spoke about the largest beneficiaries in proportion to income and suggested that low wage earners were proportionately getting more than those on large incomes.

I do not profess to be a mathematician, but if I am on €200 per week and get a 5% increase, I make it out to come to €210 per week. If I was lucky enough to be on €1,000 per week and got a 2% increase, it would raise me to €1,020 per week. It would be a €20 rather than a €10 increase. The €210 a week guy will not be raising a glass to the Government on the budget, but the guy on €1,020 might go so far as to raise a small glass of sherry to say "Thank you very much, Government." That is as far as my knowledge of mathematics extends.

The Government had choices in the budget. According to its own figures, the debt-to-GDP ratio is falling, allowing greater leeway in determining fiscal policy. However, the Government did not make fair choices that would have assisted the most disadvantaged people in our society. The budget could and should have been a great deal better for low and middle income earners, and Sinn Féin's alternative budget demonstrated that this could be done. The Government should have abolished the property tax and water charges. Sinn Féin has demonstrated that the Government could have ended both taxes and put €800 million back into the economy and the pockets of struggling families. Austerity has severely damaged many communities throughout Ireland. Emigration, coupled with a failure to invest, has ensured that communities, particularly those in rural areas such as the one I represent, have been left in the wilderness. Choices could have been made by Government to develop communities and attempt to bring a new lease of life to these areas.

On my own brief, I was perturbed somewhat by the statement of the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Howlin, yesterday that money being used for the development of social housing was coming from the sale of Bord Gáis Energy. While I welcome the fact that the Government is finally waking up and addressing the crisis in social housing, two wrongs do not make a right. The sale of State assets should not be considered by the Government to be an appropriate means to fund public goods and services. State assets are of themselves a benefit to the State and they can and should be used as an efficient and effective means of job creation. Will the Government attempt to sell Irish Water as a means to raise funds for another project as a result of the failure to raise funds through progressive taxation?

Sinn Féin outlined a number of progressive tax measures in its alternative budget. I am disappointed that the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, is not including petroleum in his review of taxation on marine wealth. Therein lies a progressive tax option that the Government could have studied and adopted. A State oil and gas company and a progressive tax system surrounding our offshore petroleum wealth could reap benefits for the State.

I note the cut in funding for TG4 in this year's budget. Not only is TG4 essential to the development and promotion of the Irish language, it is an important element of an alternative and diverse media environment.

Sustainable energy is essential not only for the environment but for our economy. The development of renewable sources of energy must be a priority for the Government. I note a cut to the sustainable energy programme, which is down from €49 million to €40 million, according to the budget papers. This does not fit with the statement that we are going to increase our work on renewable energy.

Overall, I found it a tad unnerving to see Government backbenchers clap and cheer during yesterday's budget debate. Was the noise an attempt to smother unpalatable facts, or have Deputies on the Government benches become so punch-drunk in the face of austerity that it took them longer than the general public to understand what is happening here? The so-called neutral budget does nothing to reverse the damage to public services, does little to support real job creation, gives most financial relief to the already wealthy and will not give back even a fraction of what has been taken by stealth from our poor and our low and middle income earners. The only aspect of the budget that the general public is pleased about is that there will be an election by early 2016 at the latest. For some people, it cannot come early enough.

See this speech in context