Gerald Nash (Louth, Labour) | Oireachtas source

Citizens of this republic should be very afraid of any advice proffered by the man who leads a party which is, in Northern Ireland, sacking 20,000 public servants, including council workers, teachers, nurses and slashing social welfare on foot of the Westminster Agreement to which it signed up just before Christmas. His party has said a lot but done very little in Northern Ireland to protect people who are in precarious work, to address issues such as zero hour contracts or to move the living wage agenda forward by one iota. It is important that the House reflects on the fact that of all regions of the UK, Northern Ireland is the worst living-wage employer in the entire jurisdiction. This is the big lie at the heart of the Sinn Féin project. Its members are architects and facilitators of austerity in the North and opportunistic bandwagon jumpers in the Republic. That is a fact.

When the Government says we will have between €1.2 and €1.5 billion of fiscal space for budget 2016, the first and immediate question for those in opposition is whether they accept that figure. If they do not, where do they argue we went wrong in our calculations? Or is it, perhaps, that they reject the notion of having any fiscal rules at all? Remember that we had a referendum on these fiscal rules and they have been endorsed by the people. The rules now bind this and any future Government and they mean that any increase in spending must be affordable and sustainable. To put it unambiguously, growth in spending cannot exceed the level of potential economic growth unless we specifically levy additional taxes on work to make up the difference. Therefore, we must plan carefully and base our decisions on the evidence. If the Opposition accepts all that, then it accepts our fiscal space. The question then is how it would spend the amount of money we have identified. That is all there is to this debate, plain and simple. What would the Opposition do with the amount of money the Government is going to have available to spend over the next few years? This side of the House has set out its priorities. Now it is time for the Opposition to respond. We have said we are going to allocate those resources on a 50:50 basis between additional spending on services and reducing taxes for low and middle income earners. We are looking at increasing gross voted current expenditure by an additional €600 million to €750 million and have said this will allow us to deal with the demographic pressures in social protection, education and health. It will also allow us to target improvements in key public services about which all Members of this House are concerned..

For my own part, I am delighted to be able to confirm that falling unemployment is not just a sign of economic recovery but is actually driving that recovery. Reduced unemployment is helping to turn around the national budgetary figures. With every person back at work we are increasing the tax base, reducing social protection costs and allowing for further spending on our public services. Employment has increased in every quarter for over two years. Almost 100,000 new jobs have been created since the low point in mid-2012 and there is every indication that this trend will continue. However, we must be cautious. We all know we cannot meet all the demands for public spending without bankrupting the State. We all accept, at least in theory, that any increase in spending must be matched by increased revenue. No party can ignore these common sense economic parameters. They are not just common sense but are now enshrined in European and constitutional law as a result of the will of the people as expressed in the referendum of 2012.

Every contribution to this debate has to be measured against the same criteria. Is the proposal genuinely rooted in economic and fiscal reality and does it respect the limitations of our fiscal space? None of us want to return to boom and bust. We all say we have learned the lessons of the past and swear never to repeat the mistakes that brought us almost to ruin. There must be no more unsustainable spending, no more throwing money at problems and no more short-termism. Instead we need fiscal responsibility and stable and responsible government. Increases in spending must be in line with growth and productivity, decisions must be evidence-based and crucially, the sums must add up. We in the Government parties have mapped out our plans for the next phase. Now it is for the Opposition to step up to the plate and do the same.

See this speech in context