I am prepared to stand over the figures I gave that, comparing like with like, the real increase in expenditure in 1995 since 1994 is the highest in 17 years. The real increase is even higher than that in 1981. I will give the figures to the Minister for his perusal. In 1991 the increase in current spending was 9.2 per cent and inflation was 3.2 per cent; in 1992 there was an increase of 11.4 per cent and inflation was 3 per cent; in 1993 there was an increase of 8.1 per cent and inflation was 1.5 per cent; in 1994, inclusive of the amnesty, the increase was 9.4 per cent and inflation was 2.4 per cent and exclusive of the amnesty the increase was 6.9 per cent.
Appropriation Bill, 1995: Committee and Final Stages.
Section 1 agreed to.
SECTION 2.
Question proposed: "That section 2 stand part of the Bill."
Is that current spending?
In 1995, when the Supplementary Estimates are added to the post-budget Estimates, inclusive of the amnesty the increase is 10 per cent and exclusive of the 1994 amnesty it is 12.7 per cent. The Minister can do all the calculations he likes because, regardless of whether I am an accountant and an upstanding member of that noble profession——
A devilish one, perhaps.
At secondary school in Kill, County Kildare, we were taught basis arithmetic, It is just a matter of adding a few figures and comparing them with previous figures, which children in primary school can do. I have given the figures. The underlying real increase in current expenditure in 1995 is higher than 1981 and is the highest in 17 years, since 1978 which was the year that economic matters started to go seriously wrong.
Earlier in the debate the Minister asked me to reflect on the language I had used, which I did. I would never for one minute hide behind the officials of my Department and suggest that their integrity was being in some way impugned. It is not being impugned, nor am I suggesting that the Minister is acting corruptly or improperly. I am saying that the Government has collectively — I have no qualm about this — set out to decieve the public about the true nature of public expenditure for this and next year.
We could not do it for both.
I reiterate what Deputy Cullen said, that it is true that nobody would be any more impressed by the provision of this money out of 1995 moneys than they would be if at 3 p.m. on Monday afternoon, when the Estimates are published, the same money was provided for allocation in 1996. It is politically dishonest — I am not referring to anybody's moral standards — of this Government to try to pretend that this expenditure is a 1995 expenditure or, to use the phrase used by the Comptroller and Auditor General in his letter of which the Minister has a copy, to suggest that the liability for payment by the tribunal has matured in 1995. It has not matured in 1995 but is a 1996 liability. When the Department of Health officials went before a committee of this House to justify this extra allocation they said it was in relation to moneys which would be payable in 1996. The record of this House shows who is telling the truth.
As it is now 2.30 p.m. I am required to put the following question in accordance with——
I would like to believe that the Minister for Finance and I have mutual respect. I am not making a political point on this matter, but will he consider amending section 3 before next Tuesday? My legal advice as a result of the Comptroller and Auditor General's letter regarding the——
As it is now 2.30 p.m. I am required to put the following question in accordance with an order of the Dáil of this day: "That the Bill is hereby read a Second Time; that sections 1 to 4, inclusive, the Schedule and the Title are hereby agreed to in Committee and the Bill is accordingly reported to the House without amendment; that Fourth Stage is hereby completed and that the Bill is hereby passed".
Question put and declared carried.