May I recall that, last year, the then Minister for Finance had to face much the same situation as faced the present Minister for Finance last week when introducing his Budget? He had then a deficit of £5.3 million in his current Budget. He looked around and he had to go far afield to make provision for that deficit. The subsidies were staring him in the face but he did not touch them. He imposed taxes on matches, table waters, dances, cigarettes and petrol. The taxes were very severe and they were criticised very severely. I myself was very critical of the tax on petrol, but I have a distinct remembrance of the former Minister for Finance, Deputy MacEntee, complimenting Deputy Sweetman on his courage and vision in balancing his Budget.
The Minister in introducing his Budget then, laid emphasis on the fact that it was his aim to balance the Budget and to see that in the interests of the nation and in the interests of stability here, we would have a balanced Budget from year to year. We all know that this has been a most disastrous year for any Minister for Finance. All during 1955, there was a gradual drop in the unemployment figure, until about the end of 1955 when the turn came because of international circumstances. A lot of our troubles in this country are due to the fact that we do not realise our own limitations. It is quite obvious to us now that every jolt in international affairs has its repercussions here. The year 1956 was a year of grave anxiety the world over and that anxiety had it repercussions in this country.
This year, the Minister for Finance, in his statement, said there was a deficit of £5.9 million in the current Budget. That deficit is explained by a drop of £4,500,000 in the estimated sum in revenue and a drop of £1,500,000 in the estimated sum of over-expenditure during 1956. I cannot understand at all the inconsistency that has been shown in the figures given by Ministers and some Deputies on the Government side during this debate. We must take it that the figures given by the Minister for Finance are the authentic figures. Leaving aside the capital Budget—nobody last year could have estimated capital expenditure with any sort of accuracy—the Minister for Finance truly said that the drop in savings was at the root of all our financial troubles. Capital Budgets have to find their finances from savings and from borrowing. With a drop in savings and with the failure of the National Loan, there was no hope of our having any success in that field during the past 12 months. I sincerely hope the Minister will have more success in his efforts during the next 12 months and succeeding years and will not have to face the agony, anxiety and gloom the previous Minister had to face during the latter part of 1955 and all during 1956.
Let us come to the present Minister's handling of the Budget this year. Let us go back to the history of the subsidies that were applied to help to cushion the people against the high cost of living. They were applied, in the first instance, because of the severe cost of living and they were gradually increased over the years as the exigencies and circumstances of the time demanded. Having been gradually increased, I hold that, to avoid a jolt to our stability here, they should be removed in the same way— gradually over a period. Nobody anticipated their removal this year. I have a great feeling that, as well as the jolt such action will give to our economy and stability, the disappointment resulting from it will be even greater and will have an even more disastrous effect.
The argument was put forward here by the Tánaiste that the one disadvantage in the food subsidies was that they benefited all sections, both rich and poor. The Government that applied the food subsidies originally must have been aware of that. The same argument could be applied to children's allowances. Personally, I do not know if it was a wise provision at any time or prudent administration to apply food subsidies and to have a scheme of children's allowances.