Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

One can do this with one item but when there is a whole range of items, a question to be asked is how seriously one is approaching the legislation or whether the Senator regards the way the economy was run in the period 2000 to 2007 as so good that it should be applied to individuals. Unfortunately that approach does not work. In the context of education, I understand there is an important issue. In regard to providing that certain items are not taken into account, I draw the Senator's attention to section 24(6)(c)(iii) which reads:

where the debtor or his or her dependant is attending a course of primary or second-level education, books, materials and other items of equipment that are reasonably necessary to enable the debtor or that dependant, as the case may be, to participate in and complete that course.

Matters relating to education, equipment, books, laptops and so on are excluded, in addition to the ¤6,000 worth of assets. Where parents own, in law, the books and the equipment children need in school, those items are exempt from being part of the assets.

On the issue of the maintenance of children, we have dealt with that matter. In determining what reasonable expenses an individual will require one has only to look at how many dependent children they have and the sum of money required for them. The Senator's amendment would allow a person who had a large amount of money on deposit in a bank, as well as the Mercedes and the ceremonial item of jewellery of undefined value, to say that ¤300,000 is for his or her child's education and should be exempt. That is the basis-----