Fidelma Healy Eames (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State. I would like to raise three issues relating to mortgages, unemployment and the cost of living. I was aware that our debt-to-GDP ratio is 120% but I was struck hard when I heard recently that our household debt-to-GDP ratio is 130% because this means there is little room for cuts. It is something to bear in mind when the axe falls.

The Minister of State made a substantial contribution on mortgage debt and I acknowledge the work we are doing as a Government in this area but a unique group is not being helped and has not become a statistic yet. This group comprises people where more than 35% of their net income monthly goes on paying their mortgage. They are managing but they are being screwed in terms of spending power and this is unsustainable.

They are cutting back on fuel, heating and food. They are good people. If they could get some relief, they have the money to spend in the domestic economy. They need relief. Legislation in the US suggests mortgage payments above 37% of net income are unsustainable. I met a family last week paying 70% of its net income on a mortgage. How long can the family keep going? We have lost trust in the banks. The way to help these people is not through the banks, it is through mortgage interest relief. We have made a decision but I ask the Minister of State to think again about particular subgroups, such as the cohort to which I referred.

Last week a Nobel laureate economist, Professor Pissarides, spoke on youth unemployment and said some interesting things. He said we had a massive opportunity during the EU Presidency to persuade the powers that be, the troika, to split the budget between recurrent spending and investment spending. It is not right to include recurrent spending, like civil servants' salaries, with investment spending. He strongly advocated investing in job creation projects, which is the view of the Government, such as green tech, ICT and the health sector. We have received ¤50 million from the European Investment Bank for schools and we should do more of that. He advocated that made better sense than the youth guarantee, which is a programme we are considering. He said the youth guarantee is too expensive for so little return. It amounts to four months in employment or in training. When one thinks about the criticism we suffered for the internships, which ran from six to nine months, we should re-examine what he is saying. He also made a valid point about subsidies for employers. He said it is better to give subsidies that offer work experience than unconditional unemployment compensation. Perhaps the Minister of State can comment on splitting the troika budget between recurrent spending and investment spending.

My final question is on the cost of living. What are we doing about it? The price of electricity has gone through the roof. I know families spending ¤200 a month on electricity, which is a huge bill yet it is a modest spend. Senator Quinn referred to fracking, which is controversial. Diesel remains an issue and is driving up the cost of goods and food. How are we addressing it? What are we doing with semi-State bodies to make them more competitive in the delivery of services?