Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move:

That Dáil Éireann approves, pursuant to section 5(4) of the National Surplus (Reserve Fund for Exceptional Contingencies) Act 2019 (No. 18 of 2019), the making of a payment of the sum of €1,500,000,000 (€1.5 billion) in the year 2022 and a payment of the sum of €3,500,000,000 (€3.5 billion) in the year 2023 from the Central Fund or the growing produce thereof into the National Surplus (Exceptional Contingencies) Reserve Fund.

If I may, I will make a brief statement on behalf of the Minister for Finance, Deputy Donohoe. We have seen measures taken by the Government today to deal with the cost-of-living crisis. The budget package is a package of nearly €7 billion. These measures include adjustments to income tax bands and increases in transfer payments such as social welfare and pension rates. Complementing this is a set of one-off measures amounting to €4.1 billion, which take effect from the final quarter of this year and which are in response to the unprecedented cost-of-living crisis.

This motion is under section 5 of the National Surplus (Reserve Fund for Exceptional Contingencies) Act 2019. Following Cabinet approval today, Tuesday, 27 September, I am seeking the Dáil's endorsement for a motion to transfer the sum of €1.5 billion this year and €3.5 billion next year. This is in addition to automatic annual transfers of €500 million already provided for in legislation for each of these years, giving a total transfer of €2 billion this year and €4 billion next year.

The approach of replenishing the reserve fund has been endorsed and is supported by the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council, IFAC, and is supported by the analysis on corporation tax revenue carried out by the Department of Finance. As a Government, we believe it is important we retain a national reserve to combat future problems that may arise. Having this available in the reserve fund can assist the Government with economic shocks that may impact the State and indeed the current economic shock should it persist beyond the spring. Thus we have sought to deal with today's problems while putting aside reserves for the future.

The Government's intention is that by 2023, including the two annual transfers of €500 million, the national reserve fund, which has a ceiling of €8 billion, will be provisioned to the tune of €6 billion. I commend the motion to the House.

David Cullinane (Waterford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Tánaiste was not here earlier when almost the entire Opposition opposed even having this debate here today. We have 15 minutes to discuss a €6 billion fund. I understand €2 billion will be allocated this year. We could have a quarrel or debate about the amount of money which is being put aside. Under Sinn Féin's budgetary proposals, there would still have been a surplus and, in principle, we are not against having money in a rainy day fund, as it is called, and having money to use in the future. That is not the issue. The fact is there was no reason to have this debate tonight. We could have had it next week. We could have had a more fulsome debate where we could have had a proper dialogue around that fund, its use and the amount of money we put into it. I will not take up any more time because I know other people want to come in as well. This is not a debate we should be having tonight. It sets a bad precedent. There are obviously measures that come under financial resolutions that we need to debate tonight. That is reasonable. We had the debate. Some of the debates were very short because of the tight timeframe. We are at a loss to understand why in God's name we had this debate at all tonight. I very much hope it will not happen next year and that the Government will listen to the concerns raised by the Opposition.

Ivana Bacik (Dublin Bay South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after "That" and substitute the following:

"if and when adequate notice is given of such a proposal, and provided that adequate time is provided in order to debate the matter, Dáil Éireann will consider whether to approve, pursuant to section 5(4) of the National Surplus (Reserve Fund for Exceptional Contingencies) Act 2019 (No. 18 of 2019), the making of payments in respect of the years 2022 and 2023 into the National Surplus (Exceptional Contingencies) Reserve Fund.".

We in the Labour Party are very concerned about the manner in which this proposal has come before the House this evening. As Deputy Cullinane stated, all of us in the Opposition expressed our concern. This is a motion that deals with a substantial proposed payment this year of €5 billion into the rainy day fund, but it was made without notice. It was originally proposed that it would be voted upon without debate. Now we have this very minimal debate and yet this motion is not a financial resolution and there is no need for it to be bundled together with the financial resolutions, nor indeed is there any need for it to be taken today at all. Budget day financial resolutions relate to changes in tax law that need immediate implementation, whereas the National Surplus (Reserve Fund) Act 2019 is entirely separate from this special process, which relates only to increase, reduction and variation or abolition of taxes. There is no reason this proposal should be bundled together with the financial resolutions and dealt with this evening. The effect of it being bundled together is to remove the obligation to have notice, and the normal notice rules under Standing Order 40. It has meant, therefore, that we are faced with voting on a motion on which we have had insufficient notice that deals with very substantial amounts of money. The sums proposed are of a magnitude that would have an impact on budget day arithmetic but which could be debated at a different time.

Indeed, they could be debated, as Deputy Howlin suggested, tomorrow or later in the week; they do not need to be debated tonight. More time could be allocated were they given another day. We have put forward our amendment to express our objection to the process by which this motion was put before the House. It provides that if and when adequate notice is given of a proposal and provided adequate time is allocated to debate the matter, the Dáil would then consider this same resolution. There is certainly a strong case to be made for putting money into a rainy day fund, but we have not had the opportunity to debate the case and to hear sufficient argument from the Minister, and this is not the correct procedure for this motion to be put before the House.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

For the record, this is the precise procedure that was adopted in 2020, so it is not without precedent.

Ivana Bacik (Dublin Bay South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I think that was because of Covid-----

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am not saying whether it is the right or wrong way to go-----

Ivana Bacik (Dublin Bay South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I think that might have been in a very exceptional circumstance of Covid to take money out of the fund.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Okay.

Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I agree with the points made by previous speakers. Late at night on budget day is not a good time to consider a proposal that involves a vast sum, €6 billion, with Deputies given a mere two minutes to contribute to the debate. There is no reason for it being taken tonight and there is no necessity either. We should debate this with adequate time because of the scale of what is being proposed.

From our point of view in the Social Democrats, we have no great difficulty with the principle of setting aside a rainy day fund and contributing to it. Arguably, however, we are in a rainy day situation at the moment and there are arguments for doing something else with some of that money. One of those things could be investing it in affordable housing. This Government and the previous one have chosen the most expensive way to provide public housing, through the housing assistance payment, HAP, and long-term leasing, whereby we are putting the country in hock for 25 years, with an overdependence on long-term leasing. That would be a good use of the fund that would result in providing more homes for people who need them and doing so on a more cost-effective basis.

The other thing we should be considering is investing some of this money in green energy, such as offshore wind energy, and developing an Irish company to do it, which we should have been doing a long time ago when money was available free of charge over the past ten years or so. That would have been a sound investment for the future in secure and clean energy. There is a debate to be had about the best way to spend €6 billion of public money and the Government should at least allow us to have that debate and to consider what is in the best interests of the country.

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As I said earlier, it is completely unacceptable, whether it is €5 billion or €6 billion, that we are disposing of such an enormous sum of public money in the dead of night without proper debate. I have made our view very clear, as has People Before Profit. Other Deputies stated they do not have a problem with the principle but I do. I made this point both at a meeting of the Committee on Budgetary Oversight and elsewhere in public, and I reiterate it now to the Minister and the Tánaiste. The Government is correct to say we cannot fully rely on this windfall of corporation tax receipts, although it is worth highlighting how big that windfall is and the fact it denotes a massive increase in corporate profits. Corporation tax receipts have gone from €15 billion last year to €20 billion this year, suggesting a dramatic increase in corporate profitability.

What could we do with that money, which should not go to current expenditure, rather than put it away in a piggy bank, to deal with the rainy day now that would reduce current expenditure in the future, as well as being a good investment of billions of euro in public money we have available to us? The answer is we could buy up rental accommodation scheme, RAS, and HAP properties, vacant and derelict properties and some of the newly constructed developer properties which, if we do not buy them, will be bought by international investment funds that will charge €2,500 a month to people who cannot afford it, and we will then pay for them in any event with RAS and HAP. Why would we not use those billions of euro, on a once-off basis, to expand the public social and affordable housing stock, address the housing crisis and reduce future current expenditure?

Matt Shanahan (Waterford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the idea of rainy day fund which, in theory, sounds sensible if done at scale and over the long term. The trouble in Ireland is that it rains all the time. The quantum of funding is probably not enough to address even a moderate shower, let alone a downpour. As a ring-fenced savings plan, it has its deficiencies if it is to be raided at every fall-off in national income. This idea has been knocking around for decades and it only works in theory in our political environment. Given we are entering a high interest-rate environment, surely having this money available to invest strategically in Ireland's future would create far better potential than just keeping it in a reserve fund that we can raid because we got the sums wrong.

I am firmly of the view that this political contingency fund would be better used in long-term strategic investments. We have the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund, ISIF, model. It needs to be scaled up to accomplish the impacts we need for economic, environmental and social renewal. It is needed to support SME growth and renewal, to promote prime venture capital to fund a new generation of enterprises, to fund the move to renewables in homes, businesses and public institutions and to build much more housing. In reality, our State is now badly exposed to corporation tax revenue that is concentrated in a handful of multinationals. Have we learned nothing from our overexposure to the construction tax take in 2007? We must do better. This rainy day fund will not be enough to save us if we experience a reversal in the tax take. Our best play here is to invest strategically in Ireland's future.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am sharing time with Deputy Danny Healy-Rae.

I objected to this arrangement when the Business Committee rang around today about it. It is a slipshod way of doing business. I do not deny the merits of the rainy day fund but comparing it with the resolution in 2020 for Covid is just another false omen and a fake issue. The money could certainly be invested in projects in rural Ireland, which are so badly needed. I would have no problem with that but the figures are large, at €2 billion this year and €4 billion next year.

We are debating the budget tonight, with limited time to do so. Why, therefore, do we have to try to fit in this financial resolution tonight? The Government has got used to railroading business through this House and that is very bad. We need to debate these issues. At first, there was to be no debate and now we are getting two minutes each, but it is a downright abuse of power to squeeze this into the budget debate when there were so many other resolutions we needed to debate. We did not have enough time to deal with the amendments to them and whatever else. We in the Rural Independent Group think the merits of the issue are fair enough but that dealing with it in this manner is atrocious and totally unacceptable.

Danny Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am very much opposed to this so-called rainy day fund. It rains all day in Kerry and in most of the south west but it is raining on the people of Ireland at present because many of them are struggling to keep going. They live from hand to mouth and they need more assistance from the Government. Whether it is housing or whatever it is - there are many different issues - the money should be spent now. It is the people's money, the taxpayers' money. The Government has decided to take ownership of it and perhaps it will use it for an election slush fund later. I do not know but it is not fair. The people need the money now and cannot wait.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy. What is the view from Donegal, Deputy Pringle?

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is not raining in Donegal, believe it or not.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does that mean the Deputy's glass is half full?

Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is an omen.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We should nonetheless have a rainy day fund that is debated properly in the House and about which there is time to have a proper discussion. That is vital. The way this debate has been rushed through is a shambles and it makes a mockery of the Business Committee.

Deputy McNamara is in the Chamber now and he will want to comment on this as well. The way we are doing this is wrong. I have to question whether there is a need for a rainy day fund as we stand. Surely, this is a rainy day in terms of what we are seeing in the country with people being put under pressure across the board. There is no doubt that the budget measures that were introduced earlier will not alleviate the pressure for an awful lot of people. We could use this money to make things better for them now rather than saying we have to wait and let people survive until next year and then make it useful to them.

Michael McNamara (Clare, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister spoke earlier about the merits of not using one-off funding for day-to-day measures. I find it difficult to disagree with that. Once-off funding can be used for capital projects. There is a dire need for transport capital projects in particular. People look back at the Celtic tiger and say that at least we got roads out it. If this is a boom, what will we look back on and be able to say we got out of it? There is a necessity for electricity generation capacity in this country. We can import as much French nuclear energy as we want but we will import it at whatever cost they want to sell it. There are simply no alternatives to using cars in Ireland. The idea that we will have 1 million cars and the electricity to provide for them by 2030 is laughable. While I do not have any problem with putting money aside, I just wonder whether some of it should be spent on once-off capital funding now.