Marian Harkin (Sligo-Leitrim, Independent) | Oireachtas source

There was a lot of money available to the Government so there are positive aspects to this budget and measures I agree with, including the Future Ireland Fund and the Infrastructure, Climate and Nature Fund. I actually voted for them in the previous budget and am glad to see they are being continued and that the Government is investing more in Irish Water and in the Land Development Agency. There are a few decent proposals on agriculture, including the provision whereby non-farmers who buy land will need to hold on to it for a minimum of six years and actively farm it before they can get a tax-free exemption from passing it on. There is a tax on e-cigarettes and a higher rate of stamp duty on the bulk acquisition of houses, which we tried to bring in earlier this year but the Government voted against us.

8 o’clock

All of those are positive aspects to this budget.

The Government has kept the 9% VAT rate on electricity and on the installation of heat pumps but this is a massive sum. When a government has that kind of money available to it, we expect to see real impact, real change. We expect, as many people have said here today, to see a transformative budget. While there are, as I said, a number of politically very attractive decisions here, the Taoiseach said he would not apologise for any of them. Of course, why would he? They are vote getters. However, we need to look beyond the surface. We need to look at the substantive issues in this budget and how this money is being spent. It is not that Ministers puts their hand in their back pocket and says, "Here's my money. I'm giving it to you." This is the taxpayers' money. It is not just about spending money; it is about how it is spent and where it is spent. It is about the vision, the transformation and value for money.

I will give just one example of why I think the Minister is not so much dealing with the bread-and-butter issues but more with the jam on the top of the bread. We have the free schoolbooks scheme and free school meals, which, of course, we need. Parents are delighted to see them, and parents are voters. However, let us look at the education system, particularly the primary school system. Primary schools are on their knees. Capitation grants are totally inadequate. We have the highest pupil-teacher ratio in Europe and our teachers are emigrating. Those are the substantive issues. Of course, we need free schoolbooks and free school meals. No one could suggest that this deals with the substantive issues in education; this simply does not. That is my concern about certain parts of this budget. It underpins much of the thinking here. Of course, this is an election budget; let us not pretend it is anything else.

We have decreased the cost of childcare for parents, which is hugely important because people need to be able to afford childcare. However, people also need to be able to access childcare. In my county of Sligo, six childcare providers have closed their doors this year. It was actually seven, but one has gone to a community service. They are closing because they simply cannot remain open and make a profit. The system that is in place is attractive and parents are very happy to see the costs are coming down, though not by enough but they are coming down. We cannot ignore the issue of accessibility so that childcare is available for parents. Some of these shortsighted measures do not deal with the totality of the issue that I have real concern about.

The one-off payments are again a symptom of that. In fact, people welcome all of them because they represent money in their back pocket. However, if we really want to deal with poverty, whether it is child poverty or family poverty, we know that it is long-term social welfare increases that matter. There are a few of them in the budget. For example, I was glad to see that carer's allowance will be a qualifying payment for fuel allowance, which is really important, and that the qualifying age for fuel allowance has gone from 70 to 66 depending on the person's means. It is not as if the Government has none of this but it does not have enough. It has not made a substantive or transformative change in this budget.

Somehow agriculture always seems to be a distant cousin when it comes to the budget - more of the same with a few extra euro thrown in here and there. One of the issues that really concerns me is that there is nothing about the efficiency of schemes, how they are delivered, how they are paid and the increasing red tape and bureaucracy. There will be extra money for ACRES, for example, but we need to consider how badly that scheme has been managed and the fact that farmers have lost faith in it. It is not just about money sometimes; it is also about how the schemes operate.

The Minister, Deputy Donohoe, talked about four areas. He said our investment has resulted in many children benefiting from free schoolbooks and free school meals, etc. While I accept that, nobody on this side of the House looked at the perilous state of our education system. He talked about a significant increase in health expenditure. While I accept that, the numbers on trolleys have increased every year since this Government took office. My own hospital, Sligo University Hospital, is always in the top three, including today. It is just one behind Galway with 51 people waiting on trolleys. He talked about the number of new homes and he actually said that 116,000 new homes have been delivered since 2020. If we divide that by 4.5, because we have had this Government for four and a half years, that comes to 25,777 houses per year. We need twice that, as the Minister of State and I both know. That is, therefore, not an achievement. He talked about a record number of people in employment, which is true, but our young people are emigrating in droves because they cannot get housing. We need to manage both of those issues.

I was hugely disappointed that the Minister did not reinstate the 9% VAT rate for hospitality businesses in the food sector. It will have a significant negative impact, especially in rural areas. There will be job losses and indigenous businesses will close. That is as sure as night follows day. The budget has placed increased costs on business. While we have increased the minimum wage, I am always bemused that the Government says, "We increased the minimum wage." It is actually employers who pay the increased minimum wage. Governments need to support them to do that, especially small businesses.

There is much more in this budget. I will have an opportunity to speak about some of it tomorrow. I agree with Deputy Connolly; I was really disappointed to see that no cost-of-disability payment was included in this budget. The Minister spoke about increasing numbers in the Defence Forces and improving their uniforms. He needs to look at improving their terms and conditions as well.

There were only two mentions of balanced regional development in the whole budget - regional airports and urban regeneration. Given that the European Commission has ranked infrastructure in the northern and western region as 218 out of 234 European regions, those two items will not even begin to close that gap.

See this speech in context