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

I will use the majority of my time to discuss poverty – childhood poverty and poverty of the parent or guardian – and the missed opportunity of this budget to go some way towards addressing it. Hundreds of thousands of people continue to be left out of what the Government refers to as Ireland’s economic recovery post crash, a myth told to countless struggling families across the country. I have seen this myth in some parts of my constituency, but certainly not all. Social welfare changes implemented over the past two budgets have widened the income gap. It is not just me saying this, but countless charities and people working at the coalface of hunger, cold and the lack of warm coats, two pairs of shoes and all the other measurements that are captured in the definition of "poverty". In light of this knowledge, one would be forgiven for assuming that the Government that made the same mistake not once, but twice would not make it a third time, but here we are watching the attempt to ratify the same measures after two years spent watching the earlier changes have a negative effect on the income gap.

The Government’s budget shows no appetite for change in social welfare, which tells us that we are content with the hardships that hundreds of thousands of families have been condemned to over the past two years. The €12 weekly increase in core social welfare rates fails to compensate for the damage that inflation continues to wreak on poorer households. Despite inflation going down, prices remain unassailably high. A €25 boost was the minimum required for the Government to benchmark rates of 27.5% of average weekly earnings, which was the target set in 2007, so even twice the €12 provided would have left families well short.

There was an incredibly distasteful debate in the lead-up to the Government’s budget, with a question being asked about who was worthier of social welfare payments and people who were considered to be on long-term social welfare payments being pitted against other vulnerable groups. There were even some in the Opposition who engaged in this, so I am glad that it did not come to fruition.

This Bill, like the previous two such Bills, fails the poorest. They have been left behind while the Government boasts of Ireland’s economic boons, rubbing it in their faces. There has been no attempt to reduce poverty in line with the Government’s targets in the Roadmap for Social Inclusion 2020-2025. One-off measures and double payments are welcome, but completely inadequate – the phrase “eaten bread is soon forgotten” is relevant to those who are going to be worried about where their next meals will come from – with no solution to the challenges of poverty and income inadequacy. These one-off measures disappear in a matter of weeks or months, landing those who need them in more precarious situations than they were beforehand.

One in seven children, or more than 167,000, is living in poverty. The Bill does not contain measures to tackle child poverty, for example, raising core social welfare rates by €25 or making the public services children rely on more available and affordable. Ending child poverty, which the Government brazenly claims to prioritise, requires more than a double payment and one-off measures. It requires measures such as adequate adult welfare rates, decent rates of pay and conditions for working parents, supporting parents and adequate and more accessible public services, such as childcare and after-school care. Child benefit is of the greatest help to families on the lowest incomes. Instead of increasing the monthly rate to support these low-income families, though, the Government has again to chosen to rely on one-off lump sum payments, which will fade away without reducing poverty levels. The failure to adequately increase core social welfare rates and child benefit and to address low pay leaves vulnerable families trailing behind. The Government did not prioritise access to housing, child care, healthcare and education that was suitable for their needs, including speech and language therapy, occupational therapy and all of those vital services that allow a young person the basic level of dignity. The Bill has failed to fully implement the Government’s policy on addressing child poverty as laid about in the child poverty and well-being unit’s work programme despite the fact that office operates as part of the Department.

The Taoiseach called this a child poverty budget, but he was probably one of the only people to do so. Many of the groups that work every day with families have not described it in those terms. The failure to make tax credits refundable means that low-paid workers have gained the least from the past three budgets of this Administration. According to the ESRI, budget 2025 will have little effect on reducing overall poverty or child poverty specifically while the cost to the Exchequer of the untargeted cost-of-living measures, for example, energy credits and the double child benefit payment, would have been enough to finance a second tier of child benefit, which could have lifted 40,000 children out of poverty.

The withdrawal of cost-of-living measures may increase the risk of poverty for pensioners and people with disabilities unless there are accompanying welfare increases. Temporary cost-of-living measures, which have been a feature of this and recent budgets, are providing considerable assistance to many households. As I have stated countless times over the years, the minimum essential stand of living, MESL, is the only way to tackle poverty effectively. There has been a cumulative increase of 16.8% in core MESL costs in the period 2020 to 2024, indicating ongoing cost-of-living challenges for households. Compared with 2020, the cost of the MESL food basket has increased by 21.2% and the cost of the MESL household energy basket has increased by 64.5%. Although declines in other areas of expenditure have offset some of these increases, the overall impact is a 16.8% increase in the cost of goods and services needed for a MESL. The core MESL costs remain highest for children of second-level age, that is, 12 years and over, at €149 per week, approximately 60% higher than the minimum needs of younger children, with social welfare supports meeting 63% of MESL needs. The change found in the MESL costs for an infant’s needs are considerable.

The cost for an infant has shown the largest increase of all age groups, rising by 22.4% between 2020 and 2024. This increase was driven primarily by a 37% rise in baby milk formula and an 84% increase in the cost of nappies. These two items now account for more than a quarter, 29%, of infant minimum essential standard of living costs.

I do not doubt for a second that there are lots of good things in this budget. I do not think anybody shows up to work in the morning and decides to be cruel or indifferent to the needs of people who are in poverty. I just think the choices were wrong. We can pick any number, but the one that will stand out for me is the almost €23 million in energy credits that will go to people with second homes. I know it is not contained in this Bill, but that will be almost €100 million given to people with second homes over the course of three years. I keep referring to poverty as that which a child or adult is expected to go without and we have a situation where people in second homes have been given a bundle by Government over the past three years. I appreciate there have been some increases in payments, but there have also been increases in costs of food and basic necessities. We have a situation where people with second homes are getting double energy credits while people with children who cannot afford a second pair of shoes or a warm coat have not received anywhere near the same attention. That is a shame. There was an opportunity in this Bill and in that budget to address some of those and it will be looked back on as a lost opportunity.

See this speech in context