This discussion has been deliberately led into a debating cul-de-sac by the Parliamentary Secretary and, having reached the wall at the end, we must pull back and get to the basis of Fianna Fáil's opposition to this section. The Parliamentary Secretary has avoided challenging the figure of £40 million which we say will be collected when section 13 becomes law. I do not know if, in the excitement of his contribution, the Parliamentary Secretary deliberately did not deal with the figure of £40 million which we say will be collected but we would like to know if that will be the case. Equally, we should like to know what the Parliamentary Secretary has to say in relation to the £5 million which is the surplus collected under the pay-related benefit scheme.
Deputy Faulkner put forward a clear articulate argument on the matter of the £5 million being collected under the pay-related scheme, composed of £8 million in contributions up to 31st December, minus outgoings of £3 million. This is public money. We know it is there and that the Parliamentary Secretary can identify it. We should like to know what will happen to it. We suspect what will happen to it but we are entitled to keep our powder dry in that respect. I should like to place that specific reference on the record of the House because we can refer to it later when our suspicions become fact. We are entitled to have this information from the Parliamentary Secretary.
I will not sit in judgment on the contribution of any Deputy as to its electoral value or otherwise but the Parliamentary Secretary in some way appeared to have cornered the market, as it were, in defence of employees— how concerned he is about them. How concerned is he about them? He has now increased their social insurance contributions by 40p a week. We consider this to be a penal taxation. Let us be clear that in all the juggling of percentages that has taken place there has been nothing like this form of taxation in the history of the nation. Employers and employees are being asked to pay a combined amount of £1.25 per week extra making the total contribution £4.23 per week for men, of which the employer will pay £2.59 and the employee £1.64.
The Parliamentary Secretary has not washed his hands of the record number of unemployed in the history of the country. Without engaging in gobbledegook or economic speculation, this will act as a disincentive to employment of extra persons by any employer, or to increasing his productivity. On the January budget we stated that industry should receive £25 million in reliefs. It got £13 million in tax concessions. Now what happens? Industry is being asked to pay £27 million in real cash terms. This Bill proposes to claw out of industry that massive sum. I called this section "unlucky 13". Not only is it unlucky for the employers but because of its disincentive to employment it is unlucky for the employees.
The tax reliefs given in the January budget were offset by the imposition of £48 million in new taxation. I do not want to go over the ground covered by other Deputies but there was new taxation of £50 million before Christmas. The Parliamentary Secretary would like to suggest that the Opposition lack concern for the workers. Of course we are concerned for the continued employment of every worker in the country as well as for the creation of new jobs. In our concern for the worker we must also be concerned about the employer because if an employer goes out of business so do five, ten, 20 or 30 of his workers.
If there is more unemployment the Government will have to share the responsibility because of the imposition of this extra taxation of £40 million. At the beginning I described it as legislative subterfuge, legislative sleight of hand, and anything the Parliamentary Secretary has said on this section has not changed my mind. It is not my function to stand up for the employers but if they go out of business workers will lose their jobs. The work force of this country have done their duty well to the well-being of the nation. We appreciate that and let it not go abroad that we underrate their contribution. What we want is work for them. There are 102,300 people unemployed today. Our great economic soothsayer, the Minister for Finance, has said the situation will improve in the second half of the year. We hope it will and any encouragement in that direction that we can give to the Minister for Finance will be willingly forthcoming.
We do not require a lecture on the philosophy of keeping people at work. The Government philosophy in that respect has been found to be badly wanting. The Parliamentary Secretary must try to defend an indefensible position: he must say that the economic problems besetting us have their origin in external rather than internal causes. That is not so. If we pick up a newspaper any day we will find figures quoted showing what the realities are in regard to the control of inflation. In The Irish Times last week, with the compliments of the National Prices Commission, it was pointed out that the Government have been borrowing too much both internally and externally. I should now like to quote from The Irish Times of Saturday, 15th March, 1975. I have already quoted the first sentence of this contribution to the newspaper by its industrial correspondent. The heading was “Prices up by 23.8 per cent in 12 months”. It read:
Consumer prices rose by 8 per cent between mid-November, 1974, and mid-February, 1975, and by 23.8 per cent between February, 1974 and February, 1975. Much of the quarterly increase was due to the increases in drink and tobacco imposed by the January budget and to the higher price of petrol.
The Arabs did not increase tobacco.