Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I will return to some of the issues touched on by Deputy Ellis as some are relevant to most urban areas, not only Dublin but also Cork. I will touch on the wider spring statement announced yesterday by the Ministers, Deputies Noonan and Howlin. Most people, if asked, would say what was announced yesterday was pretty underwhelming. There was nothing new in the announcement and many of the figures had been leaked previously. Much of the kite flying had taken place in the lead-up to the announcement and the fiscal adjustments and what would be available to the Government in October had already been in the public domain.

We learned yesterday the ratios of how we would spend the extra money available to us in the upcoming budget. It is interesting to note it will be a 50:50 split between tax measures and other spending. When the Government implemented a number of austerity budgets, which the Minister of State has indicated was necessitated by the economic crisis inherited by the Government, one could see a certain split in terms of taxation versus cuts in expenditure over those budgets. The ratio was 2:1, as we cut twice as much as we implemented in tax measures. If we needed any further proof that any recovery spoken about by this Government is two-tier, unequal and unfair, we can look at the spring statement proposals, which has a 50:50 split. Services have been absolutely decimated not only over the three austerity budgets implemented by Fine Gael and Labour but over previous austerity budgets that were implemented by Fianna Fáil and the Green Party.

We can consider the rationale for some of the cuts implemented by the Government. Respite care is an example and most people would say that was a despicable cut. The Minister of State would agree that it was a very regrettable measure taken by this Government. For the amount of money involved, there was a range of choices that could have been implemented. We could have got the money elsewhere and that would have had a far smaller impact not only on the carers and those for whom they cared but society in general. We need to examine issues like the cost to society if we are now saying we are on the brink of economic recovery. We must remember the damage done to citizens and the fabric of society over the past number of years.

In yesterday's statement, the Minister touched on education as one of the pillars for economic recovery. There was no such talk of the importance of education to economic recovery and stability over the past three austerity budgets introduced by this Government. It cut capitation grants to primary and post-primary schools and the further education, and it changed pupil-teacher ratios in the further education sector. The Government cut the back-to-school clothing allowances and let voluntary contributions spiral out of control. It cut career guidance services, making those counsellors ex-quota. The Government cut the summer works scheme for 12 months. There was no talk about the importance of education at that stage, and that is before we touch on higher education and third level facilities. In that sector we saw increases in the student contribution fee, changes in the adjacent-rate grant, the removal of funding for postgraduate students and changes in contributions that must be paid by people on apprenticeships. These changes had devastating effects on the education sector, and they will be felt for many years to come.

The big challenge in education comes from demographics. Even if funding in education is increased, it will have to be done at a rate to meet the demands of the demographics. We need 3,500 extra teachers over the next number of years to meet the rise in student numbers, which is estimated at 50,000. We need 3,500 teachers. Anybody examining that trend must question if that is achievable by this Government under the economic model it is proposing and implementing. If its record to date in education is anything to go by-----

See this speech in context