Jim D'Arcy (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I particularly welcome sections 5 and 6, which deal with the home renovation incentive and the business start-up measure, respectively. I was not particularly pleased with the abolition of the one-parent family tax credit and its replacement with a new single-parent child carer credit, as provided for in section 7. It has been said that this change was recommended by the Commission on Taxation. The commission also recommended taxing child benefit, yet the Government has not done so. This measure could have the unintended consequence of discriminating against separated fathers, because the principal carer in the vast majority of cases is the mother, notwithstanding the time separated fathers spend with their children. This goes back to the theory of separate spheres, according to which women are characterised by feeling, caring and emotion, while men are characterised by reason and business acumen. This theory is old hat.

We spent a weekend at the Constitutional Convention discussing the role of women in politics and the home and the need to recalibrate the constitutional outlook on this issue. It is necessary to have a similar recalibration in respect of the role of fathers in the home and in marriage, which must be recognised in legislation and the Constitution. We should not take backward steps in that regard, which could be the perception of this measure. The single-parent tax credit was probably the only recognition afforded to separated fathers. It is now being abolished, although I was very pleased that, following representations, the Minister introduced an amendment on Committee Stage in the Dáil to the effect that, where the designated primary carer relinquishes the credit, it may transfer to what is described as a "secondary claimant". The secondary claimant is then entitled to claim the credit in respect of the qualifying child concerned. This measure should be extended so that, by agreement, the credit could be shared or divided.

Section 7(2)(b) provides that to be eligible, the secondary claimant must prove that the qualifying child is resident with him or her for at least 100 days. How will this provision work? I do not believe there is a District Court judge in the land who would state that this can be proved or disproved. Will children be brought before the courts to make a statement that they spent 100 days in the previous year with their mum or dad? Must the claimant keep a record? I respectfully request that this provision be removed, as Treoir and other organisations have requested.

The 50 cent increase in excise duty on a bottle of wine should be the final such increase. The Government should introduce a minimum pricing policy for alcohol. Wholesalers are finding the increases in excise duty on wine especially tough. A bottle of wine that cost €5 two years ago now costs €10 as a result of VAT and excise duty increases. As the Minister of State is aware, percentage profit is based on the cost price plus excise duty.

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire Stáit as teacht isteach anseo. Mar adúirt mé, beidh lá breá gréine in Éirinn arís.