Brian Ó Domhnaill (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

There has been wide-ranging debate in this Chamber and the Lower House in the aftermath of the budget. As so-called experts outside these Houses get their teeth into reality of the budget, some time will have to pass before its full effect can be categorised. According to the pre-budget statement of the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council, this budget is expansionary, with a €1.2 billion increase in spending. That is in addition to the spending on the Department of Health and other expenditure approved mid-year, bringing the overall amount to between €2.4 billion and €2.6 billion over the budgeted allocation for 2016 versus 2017. The Irish Fiscal Advisory Council erred on the side of caution given the international threats facing this country in the aftermath of Brexit and other international uncertainties, such as interest rates, the overpricing of equity markets and so on.

I welcome some aspects of the budget. However, all of the budgets introduced in the aftermath of the financial crash have been similar to those that preceded it. In other words, the lines of spending have been increased with no overall outlook for the economy in respect of how money is spent and taken in. Buried deep within the budget documents is a €30 million cut to the value-for-money expenditure unit in the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government, a move that does not make me feel optimistic. We are cutting money where we should be allocating it if we are to behave with fiscal responsibility. That Department will have a greatly increased budget next year but the part of it relating to value-for-money unit is being cut. That is wrong.

There have been allocations in this budget to try to please many and the Government has a responsibility to govern. Those who criticise can do so but those who criticise today are the same people who stood back and made no credible attempt to form an Administration when there was a requirement to do so. The criticism in both Houses today is tongue-in-cheek in nature, particularly when one considers the fact that there was previously a solemn obligation on all Deputies to either cobble together some kind of Government or go to the country again. I do not think the electorate really wanted the latter. The Government has an allocation of money to preside over. We all disagree and have varying opinions. There were missed opportunities in this budget, particularly in respect of Brexit. The financial services sector in the United Kingdom is worth €65 billion in tax income to the British economy. That is 10% of all tax revenue in the UK. Some of the companies involved in that sector want to relocate but there are no incentives built into this budget to try to bring some of them here. Where will they go? Other EU countries will be considering that.

I have a problem with the manner in which the housing loan scheme is structured. Built into it is an incentive for people to bury themselves in debt because they have to take out a mortgage of 80% of the price of a property or greater in order to get the loan. That is wrong and no Government should bring in a scheme that incentivises debt. That is what this loan is doing. It is a failed attempt. We had an alternative proposal, built on the British model, over a four-year period to incentivise saving and for the Government to top it up. This scheme has many drawbacks and I urge the Minister of State to see that this is drastically overhauled prior to the passing of the Finance Bill 2016. This scheme will do nothing but drive up prices and bolster the property investors. It will not work.