Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I did not have the opportunity to debate the budget with others when it came through for comment in these Houses on Tuesday but I wanted to highlight two particular issues related to it.

I am sure the Leader will not be surprised because I have indicated this clearly before. The gender inequality-proofing of the budget which has been promised and which I was gratified to see mentioned in the Budget Statement by the Minister for Finance, Deputy Paschal Donohoe, is not yet clearly evidenced in some of the decisions made on the budget. For example, as Senator Ardagh said, there was a decision not to reverse the cuts made in 2012 and not to address the glaring issue of gender inequality in our pension system, something acknowledged as unfair by the Government and by previous Governments for many years. The 2012 changes added insult to injury by having an unfair averaging system which mainly affected women and was compounded by cuts. The fact is that all those on reduced rate pensions, most of them women, will not get €5 extra on their pension. They will get less because it will be reduced and it will be pro rata. I would like these Houses to address that issue and for the Minister, Deputy Paschal Donohoe, to come to discuss, in detail, gender inequality-proofing more widely. Policy documents have been published about it but it would be good to know where the ownership and direction of those policy documents will go. I hope that we can have a specific debate on the gender inequality aspects of the budget.

My second request follows up from a request made by Senator Fintan Warfield a number of weeks ago for the Minister, Deputy Paschal Donohoe, to come to these Houses and discuss, in detail, the included tax reliefs, the tax relief schemes and their cost to the Exchequer, and how the cost-benefit of each scheme has been determined. I raise this issue again because this can sometimes be an invisible cost to the Exchequer, yet it can be substantial. I am very concerned at one new measure in the budget, which is to change the tax treatment of stocks and shares received as part of remuneration packages. I believe this is dangerous and can lead to a hollowing out of our tax base.I want to know how the cost of €10 million that was estimated in the budget was arrived at. How can we guarantee that the cost will not be much higher? If those who are on high wage packages move some of their remuneration packages to a stocks and share offerings, it could remove some of their income tax pressure. There is real concern in this regard. I am reminded of the capital gains tax waivers of the past. I think it is appropriate for this House to look in detail at the potential consequences and implications of tax reliefs. I have requested for the Minister, Deputy Donohoe, to come to the House for two separate debates. I would be grateful to the Leader if he could indicate whether he thinks it might be possible to hold such debates over the next couple of weeks.