Michael McCarthy (Labour)

I congratulate the Minister, Deputy Brennan, on his new appointment and welcome him to the House for this important debate. While some elements of the budget were very much needed and are welcome, I do not agree with other elements of it and may concentrate on those for the larger part of my contribution. Overall, there has been a welcome increase in spend and a concentration on people with disabilities, however, other areas must be considered with a view to effecting real change by providing resources and finance to areas where it is clearly lacking.

It was the first budget of the Minister for Finance, Deputy Cowen, and like other Ministers for Finance, it was his first major hurdle. I do not envy his task in attempting to redress some of the issues left for him to deal with following the departure of the former Minister for Finance, Deputy McCreevy, to Brussels. The former Minister introduced seven budgets, some of which by and large favoured one section of society over others. Trying to overcome the gap thereby created was a serious challenge for the new Minister, Deputy Cowen, and one he did not take lightly. Given this, he is to be congratulated for arriving at the other side of his first budget and addressing some of the issues which needed to be addressed. However, he needs to consider areas that have been neglected.

There are two budgets to come in the lifetime of this Government. I hope we do not return to the system that was manipulated by the former Minister, Deputy McCreevy, who saved the largesse, went on a shopping spree, bought votes for the last election and within one week of the new Government being formed sent memos to Secretaries General of Departments telling them to claw back on spending. I hope this is a practice the new Minister for Finance will not pursue. To say the least, it is cynical and not good for democracy or the body politic.

Some tough decisions must be made in regard to who will be looked after. Should we look after the horse fraternity or the less well-off in society? In that context, as I stated in regard to two previous Bills brought forward by the former Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Coughlan, I must refer to a wonderful body of people, namely, carers. It is difficult to quantify the service provided by carers because they care for loved ones and those who are less well-off than most, for whatever reason. They do not qualify for holidays or annual leave, do not have the same rights as organised labour-intensive workplaces and do not earn overtime.

The ministerial record of the new Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Brennan, will be judged on whether he abolishes the means test for carers. I realise this will be expensive but it must be done. We cannot afford not to do it. It would provide significant resources for carers in terms of the financial assistance which is clearly needed but also by reducing the burden on them. The benefit to the State will dramatically outweigh any trepidation that might exist in terms of the cost. If what the Minister stated to Ursula Halligan on "The Political Party" is true, it is a challenge the Minister must meet and his record will be judged on this.

Carers are a wonderful group. They are in every town and village and there is no area where the care they provide is not needed. As a group, they are slowly organising themselves in terms of co-ordinating meetings, swapping ideas and offering assistance and advice. In my area of west Cork, there is an active group of carers made up of people who by their very nature are selfless. The abolition of the means test is a measure which must be quickly introduced. I am surprised it was not introduced in this budget and hope it will be in the next. I realise many groups lobby the Minister for Social and Family Affairs and much wise advice is available to him. However, if he makes what will be a revolutionary move, history will perhaps judge him with kindness. It is like supposed comment of de Valera from the film "Michael Collins" that, "History will record the greatness of Collins and it will be recorded at my expense". However, this is a worthy and deserving cause and this change needs to happen.

The budget increases were welcome and the increase of €14 in social welfare payments is significant. However, this must be considered in context. The savage 16 cuts were introduced during the reign of the former Minister, Deputy Coughlan, and had an adverse effect in a number of areas. For example, it was a retrograde step to alter the criteria for the back to education allowance. The key to effectively dealing with poverty is by tackling disadvantage in education. This means providing the opportunity to allow those in receipt of social welfare to return to the education system where they will obtain a standard of education and skills based on that before entering the workplace. There is a kickback for the State in terms of the fact that most will then pay tax at the higher rates. Therefore, the Exchequer earns some dividend in regard to that scheme. It is not an area that should be starved of finances but which needs more finance and initiative. Any attempts made to dismantle it were retrograde.

Senator Cox referred to another outstanding issue, that of child care. It is a huge burden on the many young couples who work morning, noon and night to pay mortgages and child minders. While I am not sure of the best way to tackle the issue, we could use the tax system to militate positively in favour of those who need assistance with child care. The tax system could be used for this in the same way it is used to allow others to take advantage of the system in terms of the ten millionaires who pay no tax, although I accept they correctly and properly do not pay tax due to the current system. It is critically important that a similar system is used to allow parents a fair opportunity in terms of child care and a genuine opportunity to work, provide a good home and access child care based on need and financial capacity. It is a serious issue.

Many other issues will be raised during this debate in the coming days. I look forward to putting down amendments on Committee Stage, particularly in regard to the means test for carer's allowance. As long as the means test is in existence, I will keep raising the issue in the House with the relevant Minister and at different fora. It is an emotive issue and one which runs to the heart of every family in this country. I will put down an amendment on Committee Stage to reflect this and hope the Minister will consider it favourably. I urge the Minister to reconsider the issue of carers and the other issues raised, and to have a sympathetic ear on Committee Stage.