Liam Twomey (Fine Gael)

When listening yesterday to the Budget Statement by the Minister for Finance, Deputy Brian Lenihan, an image came to mind of Frank Kelly who played Fr. Jack in the comedy series "Father Ted". He was known for using only three words during the course of the programme - "feck," "arse" and "drink." This budget should be called the Fr. Jack budget. The first word could refer to the public sector, widows and those on social welfare who have borne the brunt in the last 12 years of the Government's mishandling of the economy. When we see that members of the public sector on €30,000 or less a year, widows and those on social welfare have taken exactly the same percentage cut in their incomes as the Minister for Finance, we know he has taken the blunderbuss approach in dealing with the mess that has been made of the public finances.

Fr. Jack's second word comes to mind when one remembers the Minister stating, with great fanfare, "The worst is over." As Deputy Bruton pointed out, the same was said by President Bush about the Iraq war while on board an aircraft carrier in 2003. Either the Minister is totally deluded or he is trying to mislead the general public and provide a feel-good factor about the budget. The only thing that would bring a smile to Fr. Jack's face in an otherwise dull budget is the fact that the price of a pint has gone down significantly. That is about it for the budget. There was very little in it.

Not enough was said during the course of announcing the budget about job creation and job retention. What is important is to bring down unemployment and invest in the long term. When we spoke in the House last week during our pre-budget statements, the Minister of State accepted this. It is included in his own pre-budget speech and even in the document he published yesterday. Export-driven and technology-based industries are the only ones that will save the country in the future - not slash and burn budgets which the Minister has started this year and, I am sure, will continue next year. We need a clear policy to get people working and keep them in work. That will make the difference to this country. We must consider people who are working and young people who will come into the workforce in the next couple of years. We need a clear policy on job creation - especially export-driven job creation - or we will all be up the Swanee.

There is nothing for people who have retired or are about to retire if the country continues on its current path. We will not make significant savings but continue borrowing billions of euro every year for the foreseeable future, which will have a knock-on effect. When those who saw the Celtic tiger grow and who made the sacrifices in 1992 and 1993 come up to retirement, what will be there for them if this country is in debt in excess of 100% of its GNP? Pensions will be seriously affected. I do not get the sense from the budget that the Government is out to protect jobs or has a clear plan over the next couple of years to do so.

Many are giving out about the cuts to disability payments, widows' pensions and payments for those who are blind. It will only get worse if we do not sort out issues around unemployment. By the end of next year the Government could be paying €2 billion extra in interest repayments on its loans with international banks, plus it will be expecting to pay out another €1.5 billion for social welfare payments and other payments to the 75,000 it expects will lose their jobs next year, that is, €3.5 billion in total. If we continue on that road, there will be stagnation in the public finances. While there may be much talk that the Minister is going the right way and has done a great job, and international bankers will clap him on the back the next time they meet him in London or wherever else he is going, it will not solve our problems at all. The Government is not giving the sort of direction for which we are looking.

On a matter that directly affects myself, County Wexford was excluded from the natural gas pipeline system set up by Bord Gáis Éireann a number of years ago. At the time the company published a report stating the amount of energy usage in County Wexford would not justify extending these pipelines and it now transpires that even within Wexford town there are a number of industries that would use four times the figure published in that report. This is important because there are a number of industries in Wexford, for instance, the creamery and Celtic Linen, which must operate in a national or international environment, which have no access to natural gas and therefore will be hammered by the carbon tax on their fuel used. No matter how efficient these companies are, they will pay that penalty. They have no alternative. They cannot access natural gas. Does this mean that in order to fulfil the green agenda, we will see more unemployment in County Wexford because Government policy makes the county's industries uncompetitive in comparison to industries in Dublin, Cork or Galway, or will the Department of Finance adopt joined-up government and ensure that natural gas can get to these companies so they can compete on an equal footing? The tax, amounting to €15 for every 1,000 litres of fuel used, is quite a significant burden on the companies concerned.

The Minister for Finance is considering bringing in a property tax at some stage and is starting up a process of registration of ownership and valuation of lands and houses across the country. If he is seriously committed to the prospect of a green agenda and reducing our carbon footprint, maybe he should also look at the energy ratings of all these houses he will register. Somebody in County Wexford put it to me that maybe the Minister should have linked the tax on second houses to their energy ratings so that if the houses have a good energy rating or if their owners go to the trouble of ensuring their energy ratings are as high as possible, that should be reflected in the taxes the Minister imposes on these individuals. At present the Minister has applied property tax to second homes and he is planning to impose it on all properties across the country, but maybe he should adopt such joined-up thinking and put this into play right from the beginning. That would be useful. People understand that property taxes will come and they will be higher than the current tax on second homes, but maybe the Minister can make it possible for people to be proactive in energy use by linking such taxes to how energy efficient these properties are. It would encourage people to do the right thing.

I was concerned by how in the budget statement the Minister presented linking pensions increases to the consumer price index. There is a need for more clarity on that as soon as possible rather than stating that it will be done at some stage next year. This could cause significant problems, especially for those on public sector pensions or who plan on getting public sector pensions in the future. They need to know clearly whether that linkage between pay and pensions is gone, and what potential effects that could have for them in the future. There will be downward pressure on pensions if the economic situation remains poor in future and that is something people understand instinctively. The Minister needs to make it clear. He stated he is not touching pensions next year, but he should make clearer exactly what would be the outcome for those on public sector pensions in the future if this linkage is broken.

When the Minister is thinking about this linkage of pension increases with the consumer price index, maybe he should also look at other aspects of it. One of the issues thrown up by this budget is that the Minister has slashed jobseeker's allowance, in particular for young people. The inference is there are young people from Northern Ireland drawing jobseeker's allowance in the South and the Minister is trying to equalise somewhat the rate being paid in the South with that being paid in the North.

There was an interesting programme on social welfare fraud on RTE on Tuesday night last. The Government could do a great deal more to limit social welfare fraud. There is substantial anecdotal evidence in discussions among the general public on who is participating in social welfare fraud and maybe the Minister should issue a statement, or get the relevant Minister, Deputy Mary Hanafin, when she contributes in the Lower House, to refer to it. People are saying there are individuals flying back from Eastern European countries to collect child benefit in this country. A European-wide ruling states we must pay child benefit if one or other of the parents is working in this country. Although fair enough, that might be a historic European-wide ruling. It is so easy now for families to live in Eastern European countries and one parent to work here flying back and forth on cheap Ryanair flights, that maybe the Minister should also ask the European Union to have these child benefits linked to the country where the children are being reared rather than have the child benefits, which are being paid by the State, linked only to the parent involved. This is a matter at which the Minister should look over time. Maybe we will get a chance to discuss this in greater detail as time goes on.

A few of the matters in the budget about which I was quite concerned which need to be fleshed out a little more are the changes to the PRSI dental and optical benefit scheme, and the changes to access to dentistry for PRSI contributors. A significant percentage of those who pay PRSI only have access to good dental care because of this scheme. The Minister stated the scheme is only suspended, but there is a need for us to ensure this access is not suspended for a lengthy period. It will only lead to further complications and further misery for the individuals involved if this scheme is shut down for a significant period. The Minister should have a look at that.

I want the Minister of State to refer in his response to some of the cost-cutting measures within the HSE, one of which is transport costs. I have a feeling that transport costs may include the transfer of patients to hospital by taxis and buses. I accept there is a certain amount of abuse of the system, but the service is vital for counties like Wexford which has a general hospital. Most of the patients in County Wexford who require regional or specialised services must go to Waterford or Dublin. Their only means of access is that type of transport system, so I do not want to see a blanket reduction in access to such services when the HSE is making cuts. I want to see what the HSE is proposing in order to stop abuses of the system and ensure continued access to regional and specialised hospitals.

There are also concerns about cuts in the educational system, some of which will apply to the VTOS and Youthreach schemes. These schemes allow young people to remain in education who otherwise could not access mainstream academia for financial, academic or family reasons. Such people may be lost from the educational system completely if the cuts are imposed, thus placing an additional burden on the social welfare system in future.