Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour) | Oireachtas source

This is a do-nothing budget in a do-nothing Dáil. It has been designed by committee and makes a mockery of the Dáil reform process on which we had purportedly engaged after the last election. We were supposed to have a more collaborative approach to budgetary mechanisms and the forming of the budget but these have not transpired. It is a do-nothing budget because on account of the political reality that exists at the moment, it spreads itself so thinly that it has no material benefit for any citizen.

We are trying to form a budget in this House against the backdrop of an uncertain global and political landscape, with the far right on the rise in Europe and disenchantment with politics around the world, which we ignore at our peril. It is not difficult to understand why people are cynical when they hear that we are supposed to be involved in a paradigm shift with new politics but then see this budget, in which there is no evidence of societal changes nor any economic benefit to them in their everyday lives.

This is the result of the lack of real engagement on what was supposed to be a real reform in the procedures of this House on behalf of the people. We all threw our weight behind the new politics. If anything, what it has taught us is that the budgetary process is the same old political chicanery dressed up in new clothes. Budgetary oversight was to be based on the presentation of a set of figures on which we would all make our case for those whom we sought to represent, but this week we were treated to the same old political chicanery in that after the main Opposition parties had published alternative budget proposals, we were told an additional €200 million to expand the so-called fiscal space had been found through savings. It is pointless having a budgetary control committee or a budgetary process if on budget day the detail is to be announced on "Morning Ireland" before the Ministers for Finance and Public Expenditure and Reform have had an opportunity to announce it in the House. Fair play to the media: they got the scoop, but it makes a mockery of the process in which we are engaged such that all we are doing is going through the motions.

Following publication of the White Paper we sought clarification from the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, but they did not provide any. Following the remarks last week of the chief economist at the Department of Finance at the Committee on Budgetary Oversight the White Paper published over the weekend confirmed that there would be a further Supplementary Estimate on the capital side of approximately €190 million. This was despite the fact that the Minister for Finance had made it clear to the Committee on Budgetary Oversight that there could be no further Supplementary Estimates. He also indicated in response to a parliamentary question that there was no scope for additional voted expenditure above the aggregate level already approved, but, lo and behold, an additional €200 million has been found in the period between when he issued that response and today. This proves the point that nothing has really changed in this House.

A budget that seeks to be all things to all people will be nothing to anybody. If this is about playing to the gallery of Fianna Fáil or the Independents, let us not have Fianna Fáil Members on the plinth later tonight trying to play Tadhg an dá thaobh and saying they are disappointed the Minister has not done this or that when they were clearly part of the process. If we are honest, new politics in this new paradigm is no longer about Civil War politics or the political exigencies between Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael but about management and who has the better management plan. Perhaps it is time they buried the hatchet; otherwise let us get on with the new politics in a real and meaningful way.

On public sector pay, the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform incorrectly stated: "Today’s budget includes the provision of €290 million for pay increases agreed under the Lansdowne Road Agreement." I would like to nail that lie. The provision relates to the restoration of pay. It is important that the impression not be conveyed from this House that it is for pay increases; it is for a hard fought for restoration of pay by the former Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Brendan Howlin.

This is a budget that misdirects resources in its scatter-gun approach. It provides an additional €50 million plus for child care services and over €25 million for a sheep scheme. It does very little by way of an impact on child care. I refer to Deputy Joan Burton's contribution and what could have be done in that regard. The Labour Party's budget submission was costed on the basis of the parameters provided for last week, notwithstanding the additional €200 million that has been found. For example, as proposed in the Labour Party's submission, for an additional €177 million we could have a universal child care scheme for children under 12 years, at a cost of €71 million, and a cap on the cost to parents at €4.25 per hour for up to 40 hours a week. This would have a real impact. What we have instead is an opaque scheme, subject to publication of the details, which provides for subsidised child care from September 2017 for parents earning under €47,000, up to a figure of €8,000 for children from six months to 15 years old, and a €900 subsidy for those on a combined income above €47,000. If the budgetary process is to mean anything, these details should have been furnished to us. If we are about ensuring a more collaborative Dáil in checking the power of the Cabinet, we should have had the real detail in order to engage in a critique of it today and receive an early response in that regard.

The additional spend of €35 million on child care service is not very imaginative when one considers that, as I said, €25 million is being provided for the sheep sector. This speaks to the imbalance in the Government's priorities. The Minister did not refer to upskilling those involved in the child care sector. Within the envelope of €177 million he could, for example, have created a living wage of €11.50 per hour for all child care workers, at a cost of €62 million approximately. He could also have provided for an additional four weeks of paternity leave, at a cost of €42 million. The Labour Party proposed a set of measures which, instead of providing for a piecemeal reduction in the USC that will have no real knock-on effect in quality of life for people, would have enabled the Government to invest taxpayers hard earned taxes in the delivery of a more comprehensive child care sector which would have provided for the upskilling of workers, proper wages for those within the sector, opportunities to engage in continuing professional development and for a greater degree of universality. I acknowledge that there is a degree of universality in what the Minister is proposing, but we want to see the details. It would have been good to have had them immediately.

Budget 2016 provided for an increase in the old age pension. Last year the Labour Party was excoriated in every constituency by Fianna Fáil for having only given old age pensioners a miserly €3 extra in their pension payments.

When one weighs up the increase in the Christmas bonus and looks at the €3 increase for those on the pension, it amounted to an increase over a full 52 weeks of €271. People from Fianna Fáil went out and did battle for the €5 increase. The net result of this Fianna Fáil-Fine Gael budget will be a total net increase, when one adds in the Christmas bonus and the €5 from 1 March, of €245. In fact, the cumulative or net increase in 2017 is less than the net increase in 2016. That is not taking into account the increase in the fuel allowance last year, which I see no evidence of this year.

See this speech in context