Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent) | Oireachtas source

Is rud dearfach é go bhfuil an díospóireacht seo ar siúl againn agus go mbeidh sé ar siúl amárach chomh maith ionas nach ndéanfaimid dearmad ar na fadhbanna agus ar na deacrachtaí atá ag daoine áirithe sa tír seo.

The Government tells us that austerity is over. While I acknowledge that there are various signs of this, unless ordinary people feel austerity is over, it is not. Those of us who represent particular constituencies, including Dublin Central which I represent, know from the high rates of unemployment, lone parents and extensive housing waiting lists and homelessness in these areas that austerity is far from over. The debate on this motion allows us an opportunity to concentrate on the real world and take a reality check on what has been going on. It is difficult to reconcile the statistics and the percentages which say one thing with the reality on the ground as we see it. One reality that cannot be avoided, as set out in the statistics provided in Deputy Boyd Barrett's comprehensive motion, is the growing inequality in society. We know that income inequality will increase further unless there is a change in economic and social policy. The TASC report, Cherishing all Equally, the basis for which is Revenue tax returns and other data, provides a good picture of the situation and corresponds with the picture of inequality among the people we meet. That report sounds the warning that cutting taxes instead of investing in public services will lead to further economic inequality.

This Government was left with an appalling mess. The more I read of what is emerging at the banking inquiry the more appalling that mess. It appears that in spite of signs and warnings - I know there is an issue around those who were supposed to see the warning signs but did not or ignored them or chose to look the other way - decisions were made or not made, leading to a disastrous situation. The only analogy is that of Nero fiddling while Rome burned. The horrible irony is that all these austerity measures could have been avoided.

In the north inner city, which is part of Dublin Central, which I represent, only 25% of houses are owner occupied. This area comprises private tenants, public authority tenants and social housing tenants and little or no rent control, leading to rent increases every day which threaten the reality of people being made homeless. Unemployment and youth unemployment in this area is very high. I see every day how deprivation leads to increased drug dealing as a means of potential income and an increase in crime by those trying to find money to buy drugs. Continued austerity is feeding this misery. Earlier today the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, acknowledged that youth unemployment in Europe is fostering extremism. I believe it is also fostering many other social ills in our society and, in particular, is affecting the self esteem of our young people.

This motion put forward by Deputy Boyd Barrett is further proof of an issue I addressed in a previous Private Members' motion, namely, the need for agreement that the income gap between the basic social welfare rates and the income required for a minimally adequate standard of living, as measured by the Vincentian Partnership for Social Justice, and minimal essential budgetary standards should be reduced in each year's budget and that, prior to the publication of budgets, the affects of budgetary impacts on people be analysed by a properly conducted social impact survey. If this was done, there would be no need for debates such as the one we are having tonight and tomorrow night.

Community sector workers in Dublin Central and other areas who are providing vital services in areas most affected by austerity are under significant pressure and stress owing to the tendering process for the social inclusion and community activation programmes, which issue I have previously brought to the attention of this House. These community development groups provide educational assistance, job activation programmes, business start-up programmes, affordable child care, after school programmes, youth groups and services for senior citizens in areas where there are no other alternatives. There are parts of this country where people have alternatives in terms of these services but there is a significant number of areas that do not have them. The following is a quote from one of the community workers affected:

Walls have gone up around this Administration and we are unable to access where decisions are being made. Now, we see a drive to privatise the sector, with no engagement with the Minister and no dialogue with him. It is so frustrating and demoralising. What were community-led initiatives will be national programmes feeding into a European programme and the particular needs of communities, particularly those most affected by austerity, is going to be lost in all of that.

Some companies will be successful. What we will see then is community sector workers in competition with each other for jobs. As the motion points out, there are sectors in society most adversely affected. I feel for senior citizens dependent on their State pension given the extent of the cuts to them. I accept the Government had to make difficult decisions but the decisions were disproportionately difficult for certain sections of society, in particular lone parents, senior citizens, disability groups and communities such as those I represent.

One could ask how we address the inequality. One suggestion is that at the very least the full corporate tax is collected or it could be considered to increase it by even 1%.

See this speech in context