Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

The SPU outlines what we will tell the European institutions about the state of play in this country and what the risks are and how we will frame our budgets within the parameters that are permitted. However, I do not believe that we are giving them an accurate picture, and we can hardly expect them to understand the impact European policies are having in the country if we do not give them an accurate picture.

After all, Ireland is the country that picked up in excess of 40% of the European banking collapse and dominates in terms of its ability to borrow. We also have a distinctive characteristic in regard to GDP as opposed to GNP which to a degree distorts the extent of our debt ratio. Our debt-to-GNP ratio would be far worse. For example, much as multinational companies are an important feature in the Irish economy, such companies are transient. Hopefully, some of them will stay a long time and provide good jobs, but one cannot ignore that such is the case.

The risks to the economy is the area that I looked at in this document. The document, on page 26, describes the housing supply pressures. The likelihood is that it would be a high risk but, under impact and main transmission channel, it is seen as a medium risk. The document states that supply constraints in the housing sector might adversely impact on competitiveness by restricting the mobility of labour. It has far more of an impact than that and we are significantly understating the problem. The housing supply pressures, which most of us have been describing as a crisis for a considerable period of time, could not be described as medium risk. These must be high risk. There are over 100,000 applicants on the housing waiting list and if one averages those out as three persons per application, as there will be single households and households with multiple members, it would amount to approximately 15% of the population. It is a significant number.

Housing and homelessness is a serious problem with 1,800 children in this city alone living in emergency accommodation, and that is where one can count the figures. In other parts of the country, including County Kildare, they are not as easy to count where applicants are more likely to be told to self-accommodate, which means bunking up with family, possibly with a whole family living in a small bedroom. It is still an emergency environment and there is a price to pay for that family in the future. The business sector, including multinational companies, highlights the lack of affordable accommodation as an impediment to recruitment. The cost of accommodation is a key factor in the cost of living. It is decreasing people's ability to spend in the domestic economy and it is understandably driving up wage demands. This document needs to be amended to accommodate the real risk here, which is not a medium risk. It is now a high risk. The Government should not understate the problem because if it does, then we will not be in a position to look for solutions. The fiscal rules limit the scope to borrow on balance sheet and yet that is precisely what we need to do if we are to invest in the housing stock and achieve a more stable housing sector. If we keep saying that everything is grand when it is not, all we will continue to get is a collective pat on the head.

Some other areas are not stated as well as they should be, for example, the area of congestion and our climate commitments. Congestion and our ability to deal with it because of our low levels of capital investment is a critical issue, yet it is not identified as a risk. According to the Dublin Chamber of Commerce, 57% of Dublin companies state traffic congestion is having an increased impact on their business. IBEC, not a body I would be seen to rush to quote, makes valid points. In IBEC's view, the overall capital plan is not nearly as ambitious as it ought to be. It hopes that the next Government will have an opportunity to put this right in the medium-term review in early 2017 by acting on the recommendations for the remaining years of the plan, that it should deliver additional high-quality jobs in Irish business and industry, more reliable convenient public transport and reduce congestion, with a consequent improvement on the quality of life for citizens. Why is this not being highlighted? I remember us getting a large amount of funding transferred on the basis of the negative impact of congestion. Those were European funds spent here to acknowledge it. Luas, for example, was one of the projects that happened as a consequence. It has a much bigger impact in the Dublin region because it affects the outer counties and it is the main driver of the economy in the absence of more balanced regional development.

If one starts looking at that in the context of fulfilling Ireland's climate obligations, there is a real risk of us having to pay out hard cash in large quantities in three sectors, the first of which is transport. We need to invest, for example, in something like the interconnector which will connect up our rail lines and deliver a public transport system that has a benefit in both directions. Such a system will cost a great deal but that is an investment that must be seen in a long-term context. If we do not so invest we are likely to spend as much on fines in the future than we will on the infrastructure.

Of the three main sectors in terms of climate, another big sector would be the built environment. Not only should we build sustainable houses in the future but if we are to avoid an oil shock in the future, we must reduce the amount of fossil fuels used in existing buildings by retrofitting them. Essentially, that is an investment for the future.

Agriculture is probably our biggest challenge in that regard because of the importance of both the food and agriculture sectors, and we await to see what the sectoral plans have to say on that. However, the level of ambition that has been stated so far pales into insignificance and already we are destined to miss our targets by 2020. We will only fall further back if we do not reach those targets. We must put that in as a real risk.

The other big area inhibiting the ability of people to go to work, in terms of the cost of living and competitiveness, is that we have the most expensive child care system in Europe. It is a Hobson's choice for parents in terms of the costs involved in going to work. Often low-income families find it impossible to juggle that. One cannot but see the lack of investment in these systems, which should be public systems, in the context of a risk because they impact on the economy, on the ability of parents to function and on the cost of living. They are real risks from an economic point of view.

Earlier Deputy Eamon Ryan asked how does one make amendments to the document by virtue of the fact that we are having this debate today. It is like, as former Deputy Joe Higgins stated, playing handball against a haystack. That is what is coming back. Essentially, we all recognise there has been protracted delay in a government being formed and in the Dáil functioning as it would normally, but there were actions that could have been taken by way of providing an update, a channel for input and then debate to reinforce that. That was not offered and it was a major missed opportunity in terms of the tone of this Dáil. The Government is giving the European institutions a document that is inadequate. If the document is not completely stating the picture it must be asked if it is a work of fact or a work of fiction.

See this speech in context