Dáil debates

Thursday, 29 September 2022

Financial Resolutions 2022 - Financial Resolution No. 6: General (Resumed)

 

3:05 pm

Photo of Jennifer Carroll MacNeillJennifer Carroll MacNeill (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Sometimes I think we are looking at different budgets. Some €11 billion of a budget is very significant indeed. I remember the days when we were taking figures of €6 billion, and so on, out of the economy. It is a seismic budget. What is the alternative in continuing with existing spending and expanding that, to not doing that? Of course, €7 billion has to be spent doing that, with the remainder to be spent on different measures.

The tax measure is of great significance for so many families because we look at this through a poverty focus and lens. Giving people tax back at every level is about keeping people out of poverty and is about helping them avoid difficulties. These are people who have not faced difficulties in the past but who will this winter and who deserve a break and extra assistance whether through the energy grant or the tax changes. It is so important that we try to address in advance what we know are going to be difficult times for people and the tax changes, therefore, are of great importance.

Changing the band obviously affects everybody over that band but the proportionate benefit to people on lower incomes is much more significant. To say that this measure is targeted at high earners is simply missing the point entirely. We are desperately trying to support people who are in the squeezed middle and who need more money of their own back in their own pockets in order to have better control over their own spending.

The idea being advanced that this is a failed opportunity to have energy cost certainty is made as if such a thing was possible. If we had energy cost certainty, we would know exactly what we needed to do, which is the whole point of what we have been facing which is the very essence of uncertainty. How can one possibly give people certainty with the external threats we have been facing? What measure of certainty can we give to people that they will not have to pay bills beyond a certain level? The taxpayer will have to pick up the cost, however, one way or the other. No matter what one does, there is a measure of uncertainty, whether that is for the State or for the household. One tries at least to be honest about that.

This idea that we are somehow going to give people certainty because a person’s Bill is only going to be whatever number of hundreds of euro and no more, and completely neglect to be honest with people about the fact that the taxpayer themselves will have to pick up the cost no matter what, is a dishonesty. It should not persist any more.

Again, the social welfare package is deliberately targeted. Of course, there is the extra €12 and the measures kicking in after Christmas but that is deliberately balanced by upfront payments between now and Christmas, designed to target people who will need it most. There will be a double payment to all social protection recipients, including pensioners, carers and people on disability payments, in October and in December. There are lump-sum allowances to be paid to those receiving the fuel allowance, the living alone allowance and the working family payment. There is a cost-of-living payment to the carer’s support grant. These are directly identified to try to target people in advance of Christmas, when we know that big bills will be coming, and to then have the longer-term measures in place.

This is a good structure where one faces into each budget year having to address the particular context of that year. We have had Covid-19 over the past number of years and it is obviously the energy crisis now. That is exactly what the Government has to do. It has to look up in front to see what the big challenges are, their timing and how we can address that.

Some of the criticisms are that the Government has done too much in one-off payments and has not brought in enough permanent structural measures, as such. The budget, however, is year-to-year. There are no permanent measures. Everything changes and the budget is addressed every year. The tax changes are never permanent nor are the social welfare changes, as we do not know what situation we will be in this time next year. We do not know how much money we will have this time next year. We think that we will have a solid budget surplus, we hope we will, but we genuinely do not know. There has to be an honesty in how we present the budget to people and tell people that this is the amount of money we have this year. It is more than we thought it was going to be so we can address these different concerns that we know people are going to have.

Next year could be very different, last year it was very different and there has to be a measure of honesty about that.

There are two things I very much want to welcome. First, are the childcare changes which is something that I and so many others in this House have been campaigning for for so long. I believe this is the beginning of a very big structural difference we can make.

The second thing - where I agree with the National Women’s Council - is that this is a big budget for gender equality. There are the steps on childcare, in particular, but also on a whole range of other measures of social welfare and so on, which are big steps towards gender equality and reflect directly the work that we are trying to do in the Committee on Gender Equality in implementing the recommendations of the Citizens’ Assembly.

Last year the Minister for Social Protection very considerably extended the eligibility for carer’s allowance and it will be interesting to see when this kicks in in June how many more people have applied to avail of the carer’s allowance under the new thresholds and how that will work out. I hope that it will work well because the change was so significant.

I also welcome seeing this year the changes to the domiciliary care allowance and to the way in which that is paid. It will now be paid for babies who are born and remain in hospital. We had a vaguely ridiculous scenario in the past where the parent had to go home from the hospital and go back in, which made no sense at all. I am very glad to see that the Minister has changed that and has indeed increased the rate of payment. The last thing that a parent of a child in that situation needs to have to do is to engage with the social welfare office, or engage in that for any reason whatsoever.

I call again on both the Minister for Health and the Minister for Social Protection to take the initiative to establish an Intreo presence in the paediatric and children’s hospitals for the ease of parents to be able to access the additional needs payments that they are entitled to, that they should be able to get easily. They do not need an additional stress in having to get it.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.