Séamus Healy (Tipperary, Workers and Unemployed Action Group) | Oireachtas source

Social Justice Ireland, in its analysis of the budget, noted that budget 2017 disproportionately favoured wealthy people and did nothing to safeguard against deepening inequality. It also pointed out that reductions in the universal social charge and income tax clearly had a greater benefit for those earning more money. The TASC report made the point that the basic rate of social welfare post-budget 2017 is still €17 below the at risk of poverty line. This means the 2017 budget maintains and widens the gap between rich and poor.

What do the gap between rich and poor, the increases in payments in the budget and the philosophy of supporting very wealthy people as opposed to low income, middle income and poor families mean? They mean that 750,000 people live in poverty, one in five children lives in a household with an income below the poverty line, 18.7% of children are poor and almost 20% of adults with an income below the poverty line are in employment. This final group is the working poor. Furthermore, since 2007, the deprivation rate has more than doubled, meaning 1.3 million people or 29% of the population are deprived.

The budget and measures flowing from it mean the gap between rich and poor will be maintained and widened. Wealthy people will continue to be cosseted and supported by the Government, while low income, middle income and poor families are forced to live from hand to mouth and find it almost impossible to make ends meet. What does the budget mean for wealthy people who are already very comfortable, namely, those with incomes of more than €186,000 per annum? The wealthiest 10% of people in Ireland have net financial assets of more than €100 billion, an increase of €35 billion on the levels recorded at the peak of the boom. These assets are not businesses or companies but net financial assets held by individuals. According to the Irish Independent, the wealth of the country's 300 richest people has increased from approximately €50 billion to €84 billion. What did the 2016 budget do for this group? Changes to the tax code and universal social charge handed €120 million to the wealthiest 5% in society, while the 2017 budget gave this same group €52 million, giving a total in two years of €172 million. Not 1 cent in tax is paid on that wealth or those assets.

Incidentally, it is not revolutionary to propose a wealth tax given that wealth taxes apply in many European countries. Deputies may not believe it but a former Fine Gael Minister for Finance introduced a wealth tax, although it was abolished shortly afterwards by an incoming Fianna Fáil Government. In introducing a wealth tax, the former Minister set a precedent. We need to change how we do business by supporting low income, middle income and poor families and ensuring the wealthy pay their fair share of taxation.

I will address some of the specific elements of the budget, with particular reference to families, many of whom are being forced to live from hand to mouth. Many families are not in a position to put away a few euro for events such as communions, confirmations or school trips and must borrow from money lenders and credit unions. More and more people are borrowing from money lenders, including many illegal lenders. What did the budget do for families? It did not provide an increase in the child dependant allowance, child benefit - formerly the children's allowance - family income supplement or domiciliary care allowance, a benefit available to families who must look after children in need of additional care.

One-parent families are at greatest risk of poverty, with the highest percentage of families in poverty in this category. Unfortunately, one-parent families have been decimated by the measures introduced by the former Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Joan Burton.

This Government's budget has done absolutely nothing to right the wrongs in that regard.

Unfortunately, the Minister of State, Deputy Finian McGrath, has just left the Chamber. Prior to the budget, we heard much talk from him and his Independent Alliance colleagues on the restoration of benefits for the elderly. The telephone allowance has not been brought back. There have been no increases in the living alone allowance, the household benefits package or the fuel allowance. Over the years, the fuel allowance season has been reduced to 26 weeks from 32. Research and statistics show there are higher mortality rates among elderly people during cold weather. The fuel allowance should be at least brought back to the position where it was prior to the recession.

Other Members referred to how young people have been discriminated against in the budget. Not a week goes by that I, along with other Deputies, do not receive queries from women who are about to apply for the State pension but who find when they request their contribution records that, lo and behold, they do not have enough stamps to get the maximum payment. This is because the previous Government changed the rules. In the past, when women gave up their jobs to rear families and went back to work, those years were counted as credits. That is not the situation now and we find many women either do not qualify for the State contributory pension or that they only qualify for it at a reduced rate. That is unjust and should be dealt with as a matter of urgency.

It is welcome that the Christmas bonus has been brought back. However, it is mean-spirited that, rather than the full amount, only 85% of the bonus will be paid.

I wish to refer to the outrageous delays relating to social welfare applications. If one applies for carer's allowance, the State pension or an invalidity pension, one has to wait 14 to 16 weeks for an initial decision. If one does not get a positive decision, one can ask for a review but that can take a further 14 weeks. If one does not get a positive outcome from the review, one can appeal but that can take up to 12 months. It is simply outrageous that someone applying for carer's allowance, for example, would be obliged to wait 16 weeks for an initial decision and, if that is not successful, a further 14 weeks for a review. I have had situations - I am sure this is the case with every other Member - where applicants for carer's allowance find that before the allowance is approved, the person they were caring for has actually passed to his or her eternal reward. This is not good enough. Will the Minister immediately investigate the reason for the significant delays in the Department with regard to the making of decisions in respect of these applications? Is it because there are not enough staff? Do we need additional staff? The staff I deal with are helpful and do an excellent job. Despite their best efforts, these delays are simply unacceptable. This matter should be investigated immediately and put to rights.

Rent limits for social welfare recipients are off the wall. In Tipperary, for example, the rent limit for a family comprising a couple and one child is €525 per month. However, no house is available for rent in Tipperary that would meet the requirements of such a family at that price. I am sure it is the same in every constituency. Such a family house in Tipperary would cost a minimum of €750 per month. The Minister can verify that independently, he does not need to take my word for it. There are no rent controls, no rent certainty and no security of tenure. These rent limits have to be increased and we have to implement a system of effective rent control. During the week, a family in receipt of housing assistance payment of €525 per month, told me they had received a letter from their landlord informing them the rent was going up to €780 per month. That is simply unacceptable. Serious action will have to be taken in respect of this matter. Will the Minister review rent limits to ensure they are realistic? Families such as that to which I refer are forced into paying double rent. They pay a rent to the local authority under the housing assistance payment scheme and then a top-up rent. In the case in question, it was a top-up of another €225 a month or €55 a week. That means from one week to the next, the family does not have two red cents to rub together. They have no opportunity to put any money aside for any eventuality that might arise.

I would like to refer to the respite care grant and other benefits but I will leave it at that as my time is up. The entire policy of the Government is to support the wealthy and powerful while effectively widening the gap between the rich and poor and ensuring ordinary people are forced to live from hand to mouth on a daily basis.

See this speech in context