Last night the Minister for Finance started his speech in a sympathetic manner, so much so, indeed, that we thought he was about to respond in some way to the appeals made through the medium of this motion, put down by the Irish Labour Party. But as he proceeded we were treated to the usual set of figures and we were asked the question that always comes from occupants of the Government Front Bench: "Where is the money to come from?"
About five years ago, when financial statements were being discussed in this House, one never thought for a moment that taxation would reach the high level that it has reached. The burden of taxation which the country faced in pre-emergency days was considered a staggering load, and from all parts of the House we heard statements that the people were unable to bear any further taxation. Nevertheless, when extra money was required for unproductive services, that money was found. I do not know any better means of spending money than by providing for our old people who have given service all their lives in the interests of this country. We have to-day among the old age pensioners many men who were prepared to offer their lives in order to attain the freedom of this country. Many of those people are being treated in the same manner as persons who never raised a hand in defence of the country's freedom.
The sympathy of the Minister is one thing, but to what degree the Minister is prepared to translate that sympathy into practical shape is another thing. The Minister spoke for some time last night in what I considered to be ambiguous terms. He said that there was no hope of doing anything as long as the emergency lasts. Are we to infer that if this emergency were over the Government would be prepared to implement, if not all, at least some of the suggestions contained in this motion? It is now, when the emergency is with us, that the old age pensioner wants relief.
Even before the war the 10/- pension was not sufficient to enable the pensioner to cope with the cost of living and the position has become infinitely worse to-day. In mid-August, 1939, as Deputy Keyes pointed out, the cost-of-living figure stood at 173 points. To-day it stands at 296 points, indicating an increase in the cost of living of 71 per cent. That means that in order to place the old age pensioner in the same degree of comfort—or should I say discomfort?—in which he was in August, 1939, he ought now to have a pension of 17/-. We have not gone any way towards meeting the increased cost. Of course, the Minister will tell us that certain vouchers have been given in urban areas and, within recent months, some people have been given an increase of 2/6 per week. If we take the money given in the form of vouchers all the year round, I think it will be found it would amount to an average of 3/- a week, taking turf, butter, bread and other things into consideration. There is a difference in the amount old age pensioners have to pay for turf in the summer as compared with the winter. Even that extra amount does not enable the old age pensioners to live in reasonable comfort.
There is no use in having a sympathetic Minister unless he is prepared to translate his sympathy into something tangible. He talks about taxation and the amount of money required in order to meet the suggestions contained in this motion. He gave as certain figures last night which were quoted in the Press to-day. He said old age pensions at present cost £3,900,000, and he said that the cost of bringing the age limit down to 65 years would be £1,700,000, making a total for old age pensioners of £5,500,000. An increase of 1/- in the weekly pension, including the blind pension, would mean an additional £385,000 and a 5/- increase would mean £1,929,400.
I think I would be right in telling the Minister that there would be no hesitation on the part of any member of the House, if the whips were taken off in all Parties to vote the taxation that would enable us to give at least 5/- per week extra to these pensioners. I am prepared to admit that the figures quoted by the Minister last night are huge and it might not be an easy job to find the money at the present time. But I am also convinced that our taxation and finances could be adjusted to such an extent that eventually that could be done.
The Minister asked the inevitable question: "Where is the money to come from?" He talked about the extra £7,000,000 or £8,000,000 being provided for the Army during the emergency. The exact amount we were asked to provide in the Estimate this year was £8,825,284. There is also another service which we will have only during the period of the war, and that is the Department of Supplies. That Department is costing this country at the present moment £4,126,124. If you add those two sums together you get a total of £12,951,408. I am not saying that all that money is or will be available, because we will have to leave something for the Army. As far as I remember, before the war the Army was costing us something in the neighbourhood of £1,500,000—that figure is probably on the high side. We would have there £11,451,408, and I am perfectly satisfied that there is not a citizen in this State who would hesitate to continue to pay a large amount of that taxation in order to bring comfort to our old men and women who have done their best in the interests of this country all their lives. If it were an open vote, there is not one man in any Party in this House who would hesitate to vote that extra taxation.
We did not hear the usual demur about this £50,000,000 that the country is paying at the present time. People may say that that is because of the existence of danger, that it is because of the emergency. I do not believe anything of the kind. At the beginning of a taxation year, when new taxes are imposed, we hear a certain amount of grumbling, but as the year goes on we find that that ceases and the people go on paying. The same would happen if the Minister took his courage in his hands and put on something over £1,000,000 in the next Budget. I hope and believe that, when he is introducing his Budget next year, conditions will be such that he will be able to reduce taxation, and, as I said before, if he retained some of that taxation in order to provide what we are asking for in this motion, I do not believe anybody in the country would demur.
