Patrick O'Donovan (Limerick County, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputies who contributed to the debate. I regularly attend Question Time with the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Donohoe. I read all of the parliamentary questions that come in from other areas. Every day, a new demand for spending is made in the House. In one day, the demands made in just one group of parliamentary questions clocked up hundreds of millions of euro. On the one hand, I understand that people question the process. Some people might oppose a Revised Estimate even if they sat at a Cabinet table where that was the norm. The reality is that demographic changes and pressures arise across sectors every year. That is nothing new. It is also not new that a Government would enter into pay agreements with sectors that must be realised, as happened in health and education.

I have sat in the House beside the Minister, Deputy Donohoe, when he was repeatedly asked if we would guarantee the Christmas bonus. The Christmas bonus costs €279 million. Deputy Broughan is correct and I share his view that we should pay it. That is why it is in the Supplementary Estimate today. On the one hand, there is opposition to a Supplementary Estimate being presented and, on the other hand, Members present a litany of demands for additional expenditure. Previously, we were not able to introduce a €5 increase in social welfare payments across the board. Deputy Burton will be aware that this would cost €300 million. If we were to do that today, we would have a Revised Estimate of upwards of €1 billion. We simply did not have the money to do so this year but we hope to be able to introduce such an increase in the future.

Every single day we come into the Dáil we hear about demands across the health spectrum, in particular in acute care. We have changing demographics. Thankfully, people are living longer. We have burgeoning problems in health. We are trying to recruit additional staff. Even in my area in Limerick we see the opening of additional beds. That cannot happen unless money is available to do it. Sometimes money is not available. At the start of the year, the Minister said there would probably be a need for €660 million and the total requested today is €634 million. This format is nothing new. The Deputies who have questioned the Supplementary Estimate have been around this House much longer than I have. They know that when one is setting out a budget, one does not have a telescopic view to the end of December as to the potential pressures that will arise.

Those pressures have to be paid for, however. Is anybody really suggesting we should not pay the increases factored in by way of pay agreements and that may not have been envisaged at the start of the budgetary cycle? Is anybody really saying the €335 million to go into the healthcare system should not be invested because of the pressures? Is anybody really suggesting an additional €68 million should not be invested in the education system to address a range of demographic issues, such as the recruitment of additional teachers, changes in pay for teachers, the recruitment of additional special needs assistants and the changing of school transport. Those of us from rural areas know how difficult it is to get transport for children. Changes were made this year in this regard. It all costs money.

At the same time, Deputy Broughan is right about the future reduction of the pupil-teacher ratio. I hope that will continue. That costs money also.

This is nothing new. It is to be noted that the funding, €634 million, is less than that for 2018 and about at the level for 2017. It is really a little disingenuous to say this is something new and that it suggests the Government is not in command of its brief. This is the Government responding to pressures that have arisen throughout the year that have to be paid for. We have to pay for these things. We cannot just ignore the fact that there are pressures concerning various elements of expenditure. We are not ignoring the fact that there are areas of under-expenditure. There is under-expenditure that can be factored back in.

There are greater levels of detail. I cannot really comment on the constituency issues raised but I am sure the relevant Ministers will be more capable of answering the questions. I can guarantee, however, that if the State agencies referred to a while ago did not respond positively in engaging with the communities being engaged with, we would have something else to say. Every day I come in here, I listen to questions for the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform. Sometimes Members' make demands as if there were an out–of–control taxi meter while, at the same time, they criticise the fact that we are today looking for an additional €634 million. In the round, everybody accepts that these things have to be paid for.

See this speech in context