Gary Gannon (Dublin Central, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

On behalf of the Social Democrats I extend deepest sympathies to those who have lost their lives through Covid-19 and our endless thanks to those who continue to put themselves in the front line and in harm's way. It is often said that a crisis makes us focus on what is really important. This crisis has shown us that it is not full employment alone that we must crave. The focus must be on the nature of our work. It must be secure and pay appropriately. The crisis has shown us what work we cannot live without, waste collectors, cleaners, nurses and retail staff. It has not gone unnoticed that those we pay the least are those who have mattered most to society during this crisis. It has shown us that a health care system based on need rather than ability to pay is non-negotiable. It allowed politicians in this Chamber en masseto recognise that public good in our Constitution does in fact allow a rent freeze. It has proved that childcare is beyond unaffordable. Our childcare system is widely in need of reform. Our childcare workers, so highly trained but poorly paid, should be paid directly by the State. There is the old conservative trope that the problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money. This crisis has proved to us that unchecked capitalism cannot survive without State intervention and this is absolutely the time for us to begin the conversation of how we keep our newly acquired public healthcare, public childcare and a security of tenure that has been a lifeblood for so many families during this period of crisis. Health, housing and childcare, for so long the big three insoluble issues, have improved drastically in a very short space of time, proving that the political leadership which had been needed for so long was in fact lacking.

The job of those of us in this Chamber who view ourselves as progressive is to ensure these disaster measures, which have been introduced to preserve basic decency in many families throughout Ireland, are there when this disaster abates. We are still failing in some areas. This sitting gives us an opportunity to highlight some of the groups that are being left behind and some of the gaps that still exist in our social protection structures, notwithstanding the areas in which we have stepped up enormously in recent weeks. I would like to respond to the unfortunate comments made by a Minister a short period of time ago by saying I will accept no shame for representing my constituents when I am called to do so in this House.

I would like to ask a number of direct questions. The Minister might not have the answers to them today, but I would appreciate it if he could get the answers to them shortly. My first question relates to people whose fuel allowances are paid in two lump sums. How and when will they get their extra weeks? We should praise those who are staffing the helplines at present. Those helplines are inadequately staffed, however. Those who are looking to avail of them are finding themselves waiting all day for responses to their queries. I think we need to step up the helplines by improving staffing levels, while continuing to extend immense goodwill to those who are currently staffing them.

We have already heard about the plight of part-time employees under the age of 18 who have been let go. We need to afford some degree of this pandemic payment to such people, many of whom live in low-income households. They have been stepping up to provide an extra source of security, but that has now been removed. They were using this money to pay for extra data or for Netflix, which many people are relying on at present. Now that this income is gone, the burden will be felt in many households. People in precarious employment who had two part-time jobs, but have lost one of those jobs, have asked me to highlight the fact that they are ineligible for the pandemic payment. We need to step up and offer some degree of payment to people who have lost one of their incomes.

Another important issue that has been raised in recent days needs to be resolved. Pregnant women who have been let go because of Covid-19 and are within 16 weeks of their due date must apply for maternity benefit. Women are absolutely entitled to 26 weeks of maternity leave. There needs to be clarity about whether some women who are forced to start their maternity leave six weeks early will get just ten weeks of maternity leave after they give birth. They might get even less maternity leave if they give birth after their due date. Clarity is urgently needed in this regard.

This debate affords us an opportunity to give a voice to those who are voiceless at this time. Earlier this week, dozens of specialists across the fields of health systems, public health, social policy, law, human rights, migration and equality activism wrote to the Government to express concern that the State is continuing to require large numbers of people who are seeking international protection to live in shared bedrooms and to share sanitary and eating facilities within the direct provision system, thereby preventing many people in that system from socially distancing in accordance with Government advice. They want to avoid contracting Covid-19 and passing the virus to others. It is absolutely crucial that individuals living within direct provision are included within the Government's approach to safeguarding public health at this worrying time. I am reminded of the Minister for Health's comment a couple of weeks ago that a pandemic affords no opportunity for a double-tier health service. I would argue strongly that during a time of pandemic, we simply cannot continue with a system of incarceration.

We are already seeing conversations in some quarters about how we will pay in the long term for the impacts of Covid-19. Although our political climate has changed utterly, I fear that our future political leadership will not change. Austerity will potentially be on the cards once more, perhaps with another name. We will fight this every step of the way. As someone who was politicised by austerity, and who comes from an area of Dublin that was utterly decimated by it, I believe now is the time to start ensuring we never go back there. On several occasions over the last couple of weeks, I have heard people in senior positions argue in public commentary that hard decisions will have to be made in the future. It seems to me that "hard decisions" is a euphemism for what happened between 2011 and 2016, when "hard decisions" were cited as a reason for further punishing or devaluing the role played by lone parents in our society, for destroying the community development sector and for eroding public services. If such "hard decisions" are being referred to again, we will fight them every step of the way, as we should.

The ESRI's current quarterly economic commentary, which was published this week, contains some fairly stark predictions.

The predictions show that a 7% fall in GDP, a doubling of unemployment to 12.6% and a rise in the debt to GDP ratio of 4.3% are possible. There will be limits to the choices that we take next. We have already accepted, quite spectacularly, that our current social welfare rates were not good enough to live on. It will be hard to roll this back. It has been proven to us just how much Airbnb was affecting our housing stock. This proof cannot be unseen. After our experience of a single tier health service that works for us when we need it, we will not tolerate going back to the old regime of waiting lists for those who cannot pay. While it is true that our old policies had a cost - a low tax base, for example, has a cost and a two tier health service is expensive to run - it is clear that returning to our old spending levels may not be instantaneously possible.

Where does this leave us? A recession caused by a lockdown aside, we all agree that Sláintecare on speed or our new income supports that actually support people when they most need support, are not possible given our current tax base. One hard decision that might need to be made is that the tax cuts proposed just a short time ago by the three medium-sized parties, shamefully in my view, must be taken off the table. It is no longer acceptable to gamble with our public services and the State's ability to provide a safety net when we need it most. Alongside this, it is time for everyone to pay their fair share of tax. When it comes to corporation tax, this is a republic and the message simply has to get through that if a company arrives here to do business and it is working out well, we expect that business to contribute. Donning the green jersey in this case means a commitment to investing in our vital social infrastructure, which is needed by all political parties. Now that we have learned what is truly important and how quickly those elected to this House can respond, there is no going back.

I want to address entrenched educational inequalities that will be exacerbated by the Covid-19 pandemic. There is a fear among many working in DEIS schools that the current system, where DEIS students are working from home, will entrench the inequality that already exists. The current public narrative is focused mainly on the digital divide. Broader divisions already existed. For many students, not only is there a digital divide when trying to study for the leaving certificate, but they do not even have a table at home on which to work. There is also an inequality with regard to peace and quiet in that many students cannot simply close the door and study for their leaving certificate. This needs to be factored into considerations of how we approach these difficult decisions about the leaving certificate. We need to develop a digital fund to provide supports for students. We need to help DEIS schools. There are other factors. Students undertaking the leaving certificate applied are being completely lost in this narrative. Their leaving certificate and education are as important as those of anybody else. I ask that these decisions and factors are taken into consideration urgently.

See this speech in context