Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I asked a particular question during the budget debate on Tuesday evening but I did not get a reply, so I will now ask it of the Tánaiste. Has the budget been poverty-proofed? Several features of the budget are clearly regressive, particularly the failure to index-link social welfare payments. Although the Government flagged that there would be no standard increase of €5 in welfare and pension payments, most Deputies expected that, at a minimum, welfare payments would be index-linked. The failure to do so, when combined with an inflation rate of, at least, 1.3% or 1.4% next year, with a strong likelihood that it will be more than that, amounts to an effective cut in payments to State pension or social welfare recipients. For example, there will be an effective cut of €6.12 in the weekly income of a couple on the contributory State pension.

The proposals related to carbon tax and the decisions taken in that regard in the House on Tuesday night are also regressive. I refer to the additional €6 per tonne in carbon tax. In promoting this measure, the Government referred at length to the recommendations of the all-party Joint Committee on Climate Action requested. It is important to bear in mind that the committee also requested a review of energy policy but, in spite of many promises, such a review has not been produced. The Society of St. Vincent de Paul stated that the measures to offset the impact of carbon tax on low-income households are inadequate and that many households will struggle with increased energy costs, notwithstanding the increase in the fuel allowance. Of course, the fuel allowance is only payable to one in five households in this country. On what basis was it decided that the increase in the allowance was an adequate response to the serious problem of fuel poverty? How did the Government come to the conclusion that it was sufficient to address the issue of fuel poverty?

There has been a failure to reform the existing grant schemes. A carbon tax should act to encourage people to change their behaviour but a very large number of people cannot afford to change their behaviour because of the way the grant schemes are structured. One needs money upfront to take advantage of them, but many low-income households simply do not have such money upfront. Will there be a commitment to roll out at an early stage a pay-as-you-go or pay-as-you-save scheme? Will the Government reform the warmer homes scheme, which is currently only available to those in receipt of fuel allowance, and make it more widely available? There is a very strict limit such that if one has one's attic insulated, one is not entitled to a further grant.

See this speech in context