John Dardis (Progressive Democrats)

I welcome the Minister, Deputy Cowen, to the House for this debate. I appreciate his attendance here as the senior Minister and I commend him for his presentation, particularly because it contained so many facts. We have had all the rhetoric, and the Sunday Independent can bluster as much as anybody without facts, but the facts have been spelled out for us clearly and they are a cause for great celebration.

I agree with the Minister that all we are interested in doing is producing the extra revenue to allow us give to our people the services they require. The political debate is on the way we allocate those moneys. All of us are agreed that the most disadvantaged in our society must be cared for first and that everything else is secondary to that. If we examine the figures from previous budgets, and particularly those from last year's budget, it is significant that the proportion of money spent on the health service, education and the essential services our people need is much higher, relatively, to that in other areas. In other words, if Government spending has increased by 8%, 12% has gone to health and 9% to education in terms of the increase in spending, not the allocation of the moneys.

Do we remember what it was like in the past? I was elected to this House in 1989 at a time when the unemployment rate was 14%. We had no growth. People were leaving the country on boats and aeroplanes. Do we realise how bad it was and is that something to which we want to return? If one advocated reduced taxation at that time there was a universal outcry that it would lead to reduced revenue, that all the services in terms of education, health and so on would be cut and the country would not be able to survive. We see the effect of that in Germany and on the Continent generally where there is a growth rate of 1%. Those countries cannot fund what they are doing and they have got into trouble with the Stability and Growth Pact. We had a minor blip and the former Minister, Deputy McCreevy, was more or less carpeted by the European Union. The big guys can do it, and it does not seem to matter, but it has an effect on what we are doing if that discipline is not exercised across the Community, and not just in this country.

Objective observers both inside and outside the country have stated repeatedly that the former Minister for Finance, Deputy McCreevy, was one of the best ever Ministers. There has been a consistent pattern, over an extended period, of ensuring that capital, income and corporation taxes are reduced and that spending is kept under control; the two go hand in hand. Senator McDowell is right that this is not exclusively about income tax but it is a big factor.

The Minister made the point, which the Tánaiste also made, that the best measure to combat poverty is a job.