I wish to share time with Deputies Seamus Healy and Luke Flanagan.
Motorist Emergency Relief Bill 2012: Second Stage (Resumed)
Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
Is that agreed? Agreed.
I understood there would be a 4 cent or 5 cent reduction in the cost of fuel and a quarterly review. I understand the cost of what is proposed is somewhere in the region of €150 million. I could be slightly wrong but I know the figure is substantial.
I acknowledge there is a serious problem. There is no doubt that the cost of getting to work has become much more expensive and the cost of doing business is expensive because of rising fuel prices. The rise is not exclusively attributable to taxation. The era of cheap fuel is over. It appears Ireland is at the middle of the table in terms of Exchequer revenue from excise duty.
In respect of another Bill, I sought the ring-fencing of the carbon tax. I understand the tax accounts for approximately 7 cent of a litre of fuel. Revenue therefrom should be spent on developing renewables. Some of the revenue is spent on retrofitting houses. However, if we are to move away from fossil fuels to renewable energies, we must ring-fence money and not put it into a general fund. If we do the latter, the tax will be only an excise duty and not a carbon levy with a definite purpose. Approximately 17% of our energy has come from renewable sources in recent years. The percentage has grown substantially.
I acknowledge people are hurting with regard to family finances. We are largely in the position we are in because of the chaotic way in which the country developed. The lack of a connection between land use and transport planning and the lack of investment in public transport have led us to where we are. If there is a party that is most guilty owing to its policy approach and a party that knew there would be a problem because of our being close to peak oil, it is the party that was in government for the majority of the lifetime of this State. I acknowledge there is a problem. The Minister for Finance stated he is not intent on accepting this Bill. All the Bill does is put the matter on the agenda in a populist way.
I support this Bill. It is a modest proposal. A total reduction of 5%, including VAT, in the cost of petrol or diesel would certainly be of help to hard-pressed families, particularly those with two individuals driving to work. This is increasingly the case nowadays. Fuel costs almost twice what it cost three or four years ago. In rural constituencies such as my own, a reduction would be of advantage to families which are already hard-pressed and which are being pressed further by the household charge and the proposed water tax.
At an initial cost of €150 million, the proposal would release money into local economies, which would be helpful. The major problem is one of austerity and the lack of money. What we need is economic stimulus to ensure shops in high streets all over the country are not closing and that their staff are not put on the dole, thereby putting further pressure on the State. Although the legislation is a modest measure, it would help in that regard. It would put more money in circulation and ensure there would be some emphasis on retaining existing jobs, particularly in the retail sector.
If I got the opportunity, I would vote for this Bill. I am against indirect taxation. One could say taxation of petrol and diesel comprises a way of changing behaviour. How does one change the behaviour of someone who lives in the country, however? Does one tell them never to leave the house? That is the only way they would be able to change their behaviour. It is a tax on the poor and it is a good idea to lower it. The problem is that this is a good idea coming from Fianna Fáil. Where were the good ideas for the past 14 years and since the foundation of the State? We are now meant to cheer and state Fianna Fáil will help the ordinary man. The ordinary man is on his knees and many are at their wits' end because of Fianna Fáil's lack of good ideas. It is hard to take the Bill seriously in any way. It will help people but it is coming from Fianna Fáil; that is a major problem and the Bill cannot be taken seriously as a consequence. What is the point in going any further with it? If Fianna Fáil really meant what it is saying, it would have done as it proposed when in power.
I wish to share time with Deputies Áine Collins, John O'Mahony, Pat Breen, Kevin Humphreys and Tom Barry.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
The cost of diesel and petrol has become a major issue, irrespective of whether one is working in the transport business, farming or agribusiness, or whether one is a tour operator. The first thing people who have been given the opportunity to go back to work must think about is whether they have €80 or €100 to put fuel in the car. A person in the tourism industry with a contract with CIE or a tour operator contracted to bring tourists around the country for a 12-month period realises the price of diesel has gone out of control in recent months.
Those in agriculture, on which sector we depend to get the economy going again, must pay up-front before they can obtain the oil or diesel to carry out their work. Those in the transport industry, be they bringing goods abroad or up and down this country, are at their wits' end. I have met all the relevant groups in this regard over the past three or four weeks. Rather than take a short-term view and reduce the price of fuel by 4 cent per litre, we should all take a long-term view on how to overcome the problem. because one could take 4 cent off the price of litre today but by the middle of next week, the price of oil could have gone up again. The Minister for Finance has started a process. We are a long way off coming up with a solution to help those in the workforce going to work and business and which will suit everybody because taxes must be paid. If we are to reduce tax on diesel and petrol, we must get it from somewhere else and we have a budget coming up at the end of the year.
I come from a rural constituency, I have met companies and I have put much work into this in the context of agribusinesses and transport businesses. Those companies' backs are to the wall. Some of them acknowledge that perhaps they have too many machines or lorries on the road. People could co-operate more, even in the tourism end of things. All those who depend on diesel or petrol must come together and work with the Government in the lead up to the budget to see what other way we can collect the tax. If the predictions are right - I have no reason to disbelieve them - and if the price of a litre of petrol or diesel increases further, it will cost thousands of jobs, in particular in rural Ireland. Rural Deputies of all parties are being - I will not say "lobbied" - told the facts by people in the industry.
I welcome the opportunity for a discussion but looking for a reduction of 4 cent per litre is not the answer. It covers us for another week. What happens next week if the price of a barrel of oil goes up? This is an island and we depend, to a very large extent, on exports. We must have hauliers in the game. Much work has been done in regard to tourism and we must have people in the coach business when things pick up. Coming from County Clare, Deputy Dooley knows that one could bring tolls, the price of tyres, etc., into the debate but it is the price of fuel which is causing a major problem.
It would be very easy for everyone to vote in favour of this Bill and say it will be grand and it is a quick fix, but we must take a long-term view. Some Deputies in some parties have no answers and say "No" to everything. Everybody must work on this problem and come up with a constructive idea. The problem will not go away. There is a lady in the Gallery who spent more than €110 filling her car. I spoke to a man yesterday who wanted to get off the dole but he said that if he gets €80 or €90 more working, the first place it will go is into a car. That is where we are causing problems for people who are trying to get back into the workforce. Such costs are killing them.
Will people work together to find a long-term fix? We cannot go for a short-term fix because this problem will not go away. We, on the Government side, will work with the industries to come up with a proper solution. Will everyone who has an interest in the country do that? I genuinely mean that. The referendum on the fiscal compact is coming up and people are putting their parties before the people by calling for a "No" vote which is quite stupid because they will put people out of business. It is time we all put on the green jersey in regard to the price of diesel and the other problems we face. We should look at them together.
I am glad to contribute to this debate and I congratulate Deputy Dooley on bringing the Bill forward because no matter what side of the House one is on, one would agree with it sentiments. There have been huge increases in fuel prices. As was mentioned, there has been a 22 cent increase in the past few months which is, effectively, almost €1 per gallon. This is coming at a time when businesses are trying to be more competitive and bring down costs. That is the difficulty. As the Minister of State, Deputy McEntee, said, it is also having a disproportionate effect on rural Ireland because public transport is not available. We do not have the Luas or the number of trains or buses we need.
The Minister for Finance cannot be held responsible for international oil prices. However, I saw variations in diesel prices from €1.52.9 to €1.61 at home at the weekend. Even if we pass this Bill tonight and the price of a litre was reduced by 4 cent, it would still be dearer at some pumps. While we cannot control international oil prices, there should not be that variation at the pumps. I do not know why that is the case but it is an issue.
People are finding it more difficult and, as was said, it is affecting people going to work. People cannot afford to go to work and that is a real problem and a sad outcome of this whole issue. People who go for drives at the weekend and the tourism industry are affected by this. I spoke to someone in a bus company today who told me that a year and a half ago, one could hire a bus for €500 but it now costs €650 or €700. That is the effect it is having on the tourism industry, business, bus operators and hauliers.
I have raised fuel laundering on a number of occasions in the House. Everybody agrees millions of euro are not being collected by the State as a result of those involved in the illicit fuel trade. Years ago it was perhaps the farmer who used farm diesel or whatever. Nowadays it is professionally organised and many criminal gangs have moved from drugs to fuel laundering. I acknowledge the increasing amount of detection but it is only the tip of the iceberg. I urge the Minister to put resources into curbing that trade because one would be supporting the jobs of people working legally and getting more money into the coffers of the State. Perhaps fewer increases or reductions in the price of a litre of diesel or petrol could be looked at in that context.
I fully understand the Government and the Minister must raise taxes but one reaches a stage of diminishing returns. One cannot continually increase taxes because, as we have seen, there are fewer cars on the road as a result. This Bill may not be passed tonight but that does not mean the problem has gone away. It will have to be addressed and I am confident it will be in the coming months and budgets.
Like my colleagues, I welcome the opportunity to contribute on this motion. Deputy Dooley and I live in County Clare and we know the cost of filling a car with fuel to travel to Dublin or around our constituency. Undoubtedly, the price of diesel and petrol has rocketed recently, but Fianna Fáil's sudden concern for the hard-pressed motorist rings hollow, given the previous Government's rejection of any move to intervene to reduce fuel prices. The former Taoiseach, Mr. Brian Cowen, stated that any intervention would incentivise fuel producers to constrain production levels further, thus leading the Government to subsidise fuel at existing market prices in the long term. Tonight's business is disingenuous of Fianna Fáil. Perhaps it is a new look Fianna Fáil that wants to forget its past, but it cannot forget what it did in government.
Last night, the Minister of State, Deputy Perry, told the House that this proposal would cost the Exchequer €178 million in a full year and €119 million this year when VAT was taken into account. Deputy Dooley is genuine on this issue, but how would Fianna Fáil make up this shortfall? The lost revenue must be taken into consideration. We would all love to be in a position to reduce the cost of petrol and diesel by 4 cent, but the Government has a responsibility and cannot support short-term populist measures. We are living in unprecedented economic circumstances and we must be fiscally responsible. A cost realisation analysis of every tax-reducing proposal must be undertaken. The Exchequer cannot afford to lose revenue.
In my capacity as Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade, I occasionally travel to some European countries. While in their capital cities, I observe the prices of fuel. Ireland is no cheaper or dearer than any other country. Indeed, some European countries are more expensive. This is a global problem. According to the AA, price increases since the beginning of the year mean that filling a 50-litre tank across the Border costs £72, more than the estimated £70 that two-children families there spend on groceries every week. According to the AA, the average family in the South spends more than €250 per month on fuelling a car. Petrol prices are soaring across the world. Recently, US President Obama stated that the problem could not be resolved by drilling his country's way out of it and that the only realistic long-term solution was to reduce dependence on imported fossil fuels.
The cost of fuel has been driven upwards by a number of factors. Many experts believe that out-of-control energy speculation has doubled the price of crude oil. The market fundamentals of supply and demand have also come into play. In recent years, expanding economies have created a significant demand for oil. Supply has become scarce due to a number of conflicts around the world that have interfered with the price of oil. All of these issues must be taken into account.
The Government is aware of the impact of rising fuel prices on families and businesses. I have regular contact with the Irish Road Haulage Association, IRHA, the president of which, Mr. Eoin Gavin, comes from my county. The Minister for Finance has responded to the IRHA's concerns by establishing a working group, comprising departmental officials and IRHA officials, to develop a working solution.
One of the main issues we face is oil's uncertain future. It is estimated that 12% of diesel used in Ireland is illegal. Given our problems with the theft, smuggling and dilution of oil, we must consider other means of reducing the cost of fossil fuels.
The Opposition's proposal smacks of nothing more than political opportunism. The Government has a job to do and it would be far more constructive of the Opposition to engage in providing more realistic solutions to these problems instead of shadow boxing.
I thank the Acting Chairman for the opportunity to contribute on this Bill. Although Deputy Dooley has raised an important issue for discussion, I will not support the Bill. We are all aware of the high cost of fuel. The sharp rise in recent years has mainly been due to external factors, such as political tensions in the Middle East and north Africa. The rise in fuel costs affects many sectors from private car usage to business. However, we must consider the revenue that the State needs to earn. If the proposed changes were introduced in their current format, there would be a large loss of income. The Minister of State, Deputy Perry, detailed the situation in his address to the House yesterday evening. The cost of these proposed changes would reduce the State's income by €178 million in a full year. This money would need to be found somewhere else, but doing so would be difficult. We must accept that we cannot spend more than we earn.
That said, Deputy Dooley has made a good point regarding the difficulties that the cost of fuel is causing road hauliers. As fuel costs are a cause of concern for their important industry, the Government has set up a working group between the Department of Finance, the IRHA and the Revenue Commissioners. I am glad to say that I am a member of the working group. The IRHA sought such a group for many years, but the Fianna Fáil Administration did not oblige it. To emphasise how seriously the Minister, Deputy Noonan, is taking this issue, he set up the working group in February and, to date, we have met six times, including today. The working group has been examining a number of issues in regard to the difficulties being experienced by road hauliers.
We all recognise the difficulties that the haulage industry is experiencing and how that affects our wider economy. In some European countries, hauliers can get a rebate on the purchase price of diesel. There is an entire economy known as "tank tourism" in countries such as Luxembourg and Belgium. Many hauliers fill their tanks when leaving those countries and use them on Irish roads. The IRHA has surveyed 9,000 hauliers of its 16,000 membership. We are trying to evaluate the cost to the State of implementing such a rebate. A rebate of approximately 8% would be required to attract people to start buying diesel in Ireland again.
As well as the price of fuel, another large issue is that of fuel laundering. Deputy Dooley referred to the fact that there was a lack of understanding at Government level of the urgent need to tackle this issue. This is not the case, as can be seen by the fact that there is ongoing engagement with the IRHA concerning this issue. The talks to date have been frank on both sides and there has been good engagement by those involved. We are trying to find a process that would address the green diesel issue, in particular its laundering as "washed diesel".
Enforcement action is ongoing and legislative changes that will enable more effective controls in this sector have been included in this year's Finance Act. There is a new licence for marked fuel traders that requires them to be tax compliant and periodic returns of information must be submitted to Revenue. We are also working with the UK authorities, especially in the Border area.
(Interruptions).
I ask Deputy Dooley at least to do me the courtesy of listening when I reply to his Bill, if he would not mind. We estimate that at least 14% of all diesel is laundered, presenting a significant problem for the industry. The working group is examining a range of solutions in this regard. In particular, we are discussing a pre-identified fuel card for end users of green diesel. This is the real issue, as we must know where end users are located so that we might trace where green diesel is being used and close down criminality in this sector.
We need to address the current situation, which is the reason the working group was established. We should continue our engagement. We hope to bring this matter to a conclusion in the next few weeks, which will involve making recommendations to the Minister. In this light, I will be opposing the Bill before the House.
I have seen some populist Private Members' Bills since entering the House. In fairness, not many of them have been Fianna Fáil's, but this Bill takes the biscuit. Not even Charlie McCreevy would have chanced something like this. Fianna Fáil is starting to-----
It is clear the Deputy does not represent a commuter constituency.
It is disappointing that Fianna Fáil appears to be joining the populist mob by proposing policies without explaining how to pay for them.
Tell us about upward only rent reviews.
I am glad the Deputy is listening to me because he was not listening to other speakers.
The Minister needs to listen.
Every Deputy is aware of the cost to hard pressed families of filling their tanks with petrol but a reduction of 4 cent per litre will not address the problem. Petrol and diesel prices have risen across the world and will continue to do so.
The estimated cost of the measures proposed by Fianna Fáil is €178 million per annum. If the Deputies opposite want to do something they should show us how where we can find that money. Excise duty is a static charge which does not change when oil prices increases. The additional VAT brings approximately €15.5 million in a full year. It is reckless to propose this measure without identifying other areas where the money can be raised. We are going back to the days of Charlie McCreevy supply side economics, which caused the disaster.
The price of diesel has increased by 38 cent since 2010 and the budget increases in 2011 and 2012 added a further 3.5 cent. Petrol and diesel costs at least 10 cent less than in the UK and countries like Italy levy higher fuel taxes despite cheaper living costs. The price of oil is the main problem not the tax rate. The increase in the cost of oil has been driven by several factors. Global demand has increased by 4% since 2005 despite a 7% fall in western countries. Problems in the Middle East have disturbed security of supply and quantitative easing by the US Federal Reserve has also been blamed for increasing prices because oil is priced in dollars.
In past recessions a fall in demand helped to drive recovery but global demand has continued to rise, particularly in Asia. If we learn anything from this price surge it is that we have to wean ourselves from fossil fuels. The actions needed to reduce consumption include car maintenance and ensuring proper tire pressure. The bad planning that obtained in the greater Dublin area has had impacted on families which have to travel long distances to work. That planning was driven by the factors unearthed in the tribunals.
This is an irresponsible Bill because it does not consider the impact on the economy. We have to find a better mechanism for providing public transport. People who live in rural areas are harshly affected by fuel prices but lowering prices for everyone is not the solution. We seek realistic proposals. Some of Deputy Dooley's colleagues believe in realistic solutions but this Bill will not solve anything if it takes €170 million out of the Exchequer.
I will be voting against this Bill because it provides a populist approach to a serious issue. It is poorly written and displays a staggering lack of understanding of the oil industry in providing for the Minister for Finance to review excise duty on mineral oil on a quarterly basis, taking account of the price of oil.
The price of oil fell by 28 cent per barrel today to $117 per barrel. A litre costs approximately €1.70 today. In June 2008 oil cost $147 per barrel and €1.24 per litre. Given that I am probably the biggest user of diesel oil among Oireachtas Members, this issue affects me personally. The Bill is poorly written. The issue needs to be addressed holistically if we are to regulate and examine high prices. To put the figures in perspective, the price of auto diesel has increased by 24% since 2010, while the Government's take has increased by 2%.
A barrel of oil is traded at least 500 times. Futures trading practices in EU and world markets need to be investigated. If this Bill does nothing else, I hope it will encourage Ireland to take a lead in this area. We are unfortunately all too aware of the consequences of rogue trading and over leveraging of assets and commodities by financial institutions. Speculation on commodity products like oil needs to be curbed. If speculators were required to lay down hard cash in order to make a deal, we would not see barrels being traded 500 times.
It is worrying to see commodity trading in food products. Speculation creates exaggerated peaks and troughs and damages primary food production. The food inflation that can result impacts negatively on the consumer. Cheap food prices have helped to keep inflation in check for many years but as the world population passes the 7 billion mark, that spring is set to break. Fuel and food are intrinsically connected.
The 4 cent reduction proposed in this Bill equates to a decrease of approximately 2% for the consumer but €143 million for the Government. I need not remind the House who signed us up for the programme of adjustment. If we forgo this €143 million it will have to be found elsewhere. I do not see many people volunteering to donate that sort of money.
We should be asking how high the cost of a barrel of oil needs to go before renewable energy is embraced. I recognise the problems faced by the haulage industry because I deal with it on a daily basis. It is under pressure not only from diesel prices, shocking though they may be, but also from the downturn in the businesses that contract its services. Many haulage businesses are under pressure to find enough work to meet their fixed costs. I am in favour of a standardised charging system which would allow many of our fine hauliers to stay in business. Many of them have to deal with depreciation and other operating costs. They cannot afford to change their vehicles on a regular basis but any business which relies on old equipment faces trouble.
I do not like the crocodile tears being shed across the floor. When Mary Coughlan shut down the beet industry she ignored the potential for ethanol production. We could have a thriving ethanol industry offering lower fuel prices. I do not blame the Deputies opposite for that but they should not play politics with a serious issue.
I propose to share time with Deputies Niall Collins, McConalogue, Kitt, Kirk and Calleary.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
I commend my colleague, Deputy Dooley, on bringing forward this proposal. It warrants discussion on the floor of the House. It is an issue that affects every family in the country. As it affects agricultural contractors, hauliers and small businesses, and is a topic of conversation throughout the country, it is appropriate that we take this opportunity to debate it here this evening.
If we really wanted to be populist and simply reduce the cost of petrol and diesel, we would advocate a bigger reduction than one of 5 cent or 4 cent in the excise duty with the balance being made up through a VAT reduction. We are trying to make a real proposal albeit for a modest reduction in the cost of fuel for struggling motorists. It is a very real and honest proposal to try to help the struggling families who are commuting, agricultural contractors, hauliers and small businesses. I do not believe it is being populist and it is trying to offer a constructive solution to problems we are facing. While I accept it will cost the Exchequer approximately €145 million, we believe the people getting the benefit of this reduction will go on to spend in the domestic economy and that its effect will be cost neutral in the longer term.
Many Government Deputies agree with what we are proposing and have spoken very favourably about it in the House and even more favourably about it on their local radio stations, saying that this is something that needs to be done. It is easy to say one thing on the radio and something different in the Chamber.
There are many of them doing that.
If introduced, this will have a positive impact on small businesses, a sector the Government has severely neglected in the 14 or 15 months since it came into office. If the sector got the supports it needed it could create thousands of jobs. I am mainly referring to the commitment of one particular party, none of whose Members is in the Chamber now, to abolish upward-only rent reviews, but that has gone by the wayside. The issue of commercial rates should have been addressed not just in the past 14 or 15 months but many years ago. Having said that, a new Government came into power 14 or 15 months ago and has not taken the opportunity to address the issue. This is a sector that is on its knees and is not getting support from the Government. Once again tonight, the Government is signifying that it is not interested in this sector. The news of job creation as a result of foreign direct investment is very welcome and all those associated with that are to be complimented. However, the domestic sector and small family businesses in the retail sector in particular have been left for dead by the Government. Government Deputies voting against this Bill tonight will represent another example of reneging on and neglecting a very important sector.
It is amazing that Deputy Luke ‘Ming' Flanagan can compliment the proposal yet say it is a pity where it comes from. He is a man who prides himself as a negotiator and should know that it does not matter where a good proposal comes from. If it is a proposal that warrants consideration and support, it should be supported.
I accept this represents a modest reduction in the price of fuel, but it would benefit thousands of families and businesses. I understand how the party system works - the party Whips will be in place and it will not go through. However, at least this has given an opportunity to have this important issue debated on the floor of the House. I hope the Government will move with much more speed than has been evident in supporting small businesses in order to bring about long-lasting resolutions that will result in a reduction in the price of fuel at petrol pumps.
I thank the Minister of State, Deputy McEntee for his earlier constructive contribution, which is to his credit. I am somewhat saddened by the contributions from some of the Government Deputies. If it was wrong for the previous Government not to deal with the issue, is it not wrong now for the present Government not to deal with the issue? Do two wrongs make a right or is it right for the present Government to deal with the issue? We need to bring a degree of consistency to the issue. The previous Government's failure to do something is not a reason for the current Government not to do it either. I respect that there may be a working group, but it is a serious issue which disproportionately affects rural commuters and we need to address it as soon as possible.
While I recognise there is a cost to the Exchequer, we are experiencing the law of diminishing returns for the Exchequer as a result of the spiralling oil price. Everybody in the House will recognise that people are curtailing their journeys and taking cars off the road. People are being forced to curb their lifestyles. As constituency representatives, when we are not here in Dublin, every day of the week we are dealing with people who are telling us they cannot make trips to hospital or other trips for day-to-day basic family commitments as a result of the hard-pressed circumstances in which they find themselves. It behoves us all to try to deal with this issue. It is sad that when we raise an issue for debate in the House we get mocked and ridiculed because it is coming from the Fianna Fáil Party. That shows a basic disrespect for democracy because I have a mandate as does my party. Anybody elected to this House has a mandate and we are fulfilling our duty in raising issues affecting the people we represent.
Where can the money be found? The Government will have to provide an answer to that question, through the support and backup it has. While €145 million was mentioned, we could argue the figures all day long. However, the principle must be accepted by all and acted on promptly because it affects our competitiveness. Not alone is it affecting hard-pressed families going about their day-to-day duties, but it also affects the road haulage industry, the transport industry and agriculture. Today we met the association of farm contractors in Buswells Hotel. A number of them came from my constituency in County Limerick. It was one of the top issues on their agenda and it is becoming more serious for these people to try to survive and cope in business. I appreciate there is an underlying issue with the base oil price, but we need to find a mechanism to deal with the issue as otherwise the very fabric of society will come into question. We have had an increase in the cost of rural school transport, much of which was attributed to the increase in fuel prices to the service providers. It is affecting every corner of our society. We need to get ourselves together and deal with the situation in a manner that delivers a solution in a timely fashion.
I commend my party colleague, Deputy Dooley, on his introduction of this motion, which deals with something that is on the tips of many people's tongues across the country - the rising cost of motor fuel and the difficulties this is creating for many people on a daily basis. Back in January 2009, petrol and diesel cost around 95 cent per litre, but now they can cost anything from €1.60 to €1.70, depending on what part of the country one is in. In this time we have seen people's economic circumstances deteriorate significantly. Their incomes have gone down and charges have increased, and far fewer people are now in employment, unfortunately, than in the past.
The Government needs to take a more active role in managing fuel prices. The suggestion in the Bill that we move to a system under which the excise duty applied to fuel is reviewed every three months, as opposed to every year, is appropriate. It is important that the Minister and his Cabinet colleagues show they are willing to take some action on this issue, even if only to give an indication to the public that they understand the situation they are in and the pain this is causing.
There certainly would be a cost associated with such a measure. The total estimated cost is €145 million. I would be interested to hear, in the Minister's closing comments, how he can reconcile his attitude this week about what will happen to the money that motorists save from a reduction in excise duty with his position on the same issue last week. Last week, he said that if the money was not spent at the petrol pumps it would be spent somewhere else, and therefore it would not represent a cost to the Exchequer, but this week he is refusing to accept that this is the case.
As my colleague Deputy Collins mentioned, people are now travelling less and curtailing the journeys they take. The revenue that many in the fuel industry are taking in remains similar to its previous values, although the volume has been decreasing. If the Minister were to take a stance and back a move such as we are suggesting, the revenue lost to the State might be less than expected. Considering the cost of fuel has increased by 75% in a little over three years, the base price of fuel is still not at an all-time high. It would be wise for the Minister to take a proactive approach to managing the cost of fuel.
I also ask the Minister to consider seriously the proposals put forward by the Irish haulage industry, whose representatives have met with the Minister on a number of occasions recently. The proposals to alleviate the pressure on the industry are sensible. Because fuel prices are a basic cost for hauliers, they, more than anyone, are being crippled by high fuel prices. Many haulage companies are put to the pin of their collar. It is important that the Minister consider these proposals on a targeted basis and try to come up with a solution that might alleviate the pressure on hauliers and ensure some of them stay in business during this difficult period.
Some movement by the Minister in terms of managing the revenue take from fuel would also be helpful in encouraging people to take domestic holidays and travel around the country. Because air travel continues to be cheap, it can cost as much to travel to another part of Ireland as to fly abroad.
I ask the Minister to give serious consideration to this Bill and to monitor actively and to manage fuel prices. The Government needs to take some control of the situation.
I also commend Deputy Dooley on his introduction of this Bill. It is a progressive and interesting proposal that he has put before the House. People are concerned about the price of fuel, which has reached €1.70 for a litre of petrol, and every family is discussing the topic. The measure proposed by Deputy Dooley is modest. Like other Deputies, I have received hundreds of e-mails and other messages on this topic. The e-mail I liked best contained just one line: "Please vote for the reduction of 5 cent in fuel. We need every break we can get." That is how many motorists feel now; they need a break. The proposal for a 5 cent reduction in excise duty per litre of fuel is a positive one.
Deputy Dooley's Bill also proposes that fuel prices be reviewed every three months rather than every year, which is a good idea. Other Governments should have done this, but there is no point in saying that now. We have a Bill in front of us that makes sense. We should consider the cost of oil on world markets, which is changing all the time. The Government needs the flexibility to respond to this on a regular basis, and this Bill would allow any Government to react quickly to developing situations in the marketplace. Petrol and diesel are often called the old reliables, and Governments in the past have often treated them as such, increasing excise costs often, which has resulted in an unfair burden on people. I can see how these price increases have affected people in my rural constituency.
I was interested in an article in The Irish Times today about the fuel price tracking website pumps.ie. According to the website, the average price of a litre of petrol across the State yesterday was €1.70, while the average cost of a litre of diesel was €1.60. Less than three months ago, the same website put the average price of a litre of petrol at €1.55, which represents a difference of 15 cent. In July 2008, when oil peaked at $147 per barrel on the international markets, the average price of a litre of petrol in Ireland was €1.36, which is 34 cent less than today. There has certainly been an increase, and the biggest driver of higher fuel prices in recent months has been Government taxes. Since the emergency budget back in 2008 there have been five tax increases, including an increase in VAT, the introduction of a carbon tax and three excise duty hikes, which have added 21 cent to the price of a litre of fuel. Motorists, who contribute 10% of all Exchequer revenue, including excise duty, VAT and VRT, in addition to €1 billion in motor taxes, have been badly hit by this. Even if the figure associated with this measure was €145 million, as Deputy Dooley said, the provision would certainly act as a stimulus to the economy, with a boost in consumer confidence.
We are entering what is known as the peak summer driving season. Hard-pressed motorists deserve a break, as that e-mail suggested to me. The situation is becoming more acute. Not only motorists but also farmers and small businesses across the country need some relief from the costs involved in paying for fuel. As the cost of fuel rises, people feel they are being squeezed from every angle. I notice the Fair Fuel campaign in the UK has highlighted the potential positive impact on the economy of a reduction in fuel duty. If we consider the hardship caused to people, look at jobs and agriculture and think of the contractors we met today, it is important that we do this and imperative that we move this Bill through the House.
I thank the Acting Chairman for this opportunity to speak briefly on this Bill. If we sit down and try to identify in a pecking order the issues that impact on the greatest number of people in our population at present, fuel costs will be very near the top of the pile. There are so many car and transportation costs because people are driving to work. Those who live in the commuter belt along the east coast and into the midlands must drive in and out of Dublin on a daily basis. There is no doubt that many of these people have been seriously and adversely affected by the very steep increase in fuel prices in recent times. This is at a time when many people find themselves the custodians of stressed mortgages and face issues of personal debt as general costs in the economy have escalated. The one area where we can make a real difference is fuel costs.
This Bill is framed and designed to tackle the issue of fuel costs in the economy. If we are to achieve the level of competitiveness that is clearly necessary to get the economy moving again, create jobs and have a cost base within the economy that will leave us in a competitive position vis-à-vis other places in the marketplace selling their produce, it will come about in the area of motoring and transportation costs. We have it within our power to reduce those costs and this Bill graphically spells out how that is to be achieved. Although some commentators may say that we have certain commitments to meet in our arrangement with the troika, there are very strong and compelling arguments that these proposals would have a stimulus effect in the economy. If we look at some of the projections made by units looking at this general area in the UK and transpose them to Ireland, clearly the same type of benefits will accrue to our economy.
Taking the tourism industry, particularly the number of people who take their holidays outside the country, it would make a difference if we could succeed in getting 30% of them to holiday at home. Motoring costs are one of the most significant elements of the holiday spend in Ireland. People plan their holidays. If the Government and the Minister for Finance can convince one in three of those who holiday abroad to take their holidays at home, imagine the revenue benefit that would accrue to the Minister's Department and to the Exchequer. If this Bill finds the support of a majority of Members, it will go a long way to meet the sort of requirements that exist in that area.
In recent days I was especially heartened by a backbencher on the Government side. I am sorry he is not in the House so that I could compliment him. He has spoken on local radio, exhorting the Minister for Finance and the Government to look at the issue of the cost of fuel for transportation, social driving and driving to work. I do not know if the Deputy has had an opportunity to speak in this debate but I hope that when we come to vote on it in half an hour, he will see the merit in the argument that has been advanced for this Bill and will make the ultimate call on behalf of those he was rightly advocating for by supporting it. We await developments. There are only 25 minutes to wait and see what will happen. I encourage the Minister for Finance to forgive the particular Deputy if he takes that road tonight. He would be doing a great deed for the country but we will await developments and see how things pan out.
I am sorry I have only a limited time to speak. I lend my support to the Bill and to my party advocate, Deputy Timmy Dooley, and I hope the Minister for Finance, who we are glad to see present for the debate, will see the merit in the arguments and the points advanced and perhaps consider implementing them.
I, too, thank Deputy Dooley for highlighting this issue. In spite of all the controversy and excitement surrounding the household charge and water metering, this problem is probably bigger than both in terms of the pressures it puts on families and small businesses. I welcome the Fine Gael Deputies back from Punchestown. I hope they did not get too wet.
The Bill has been around for some time.
There were a few Fianna Fáilers there too.
This Government's refusal to do anything about it, however, on the basis that the last Government did not do anything about it is not a justifiable explanation. I noticed another explanation given by the Minister yesterday, namely, that it was not proper to take the budget apart so early into its term. The Minister is right. I hope the Minister for Social Protection was listening to him when he said that.
This charge is driving very many costs. The current level of fuel rates in our domestic economy is driving costs for small business and for haulage, which goes directly back to those who were championing exports and their ability to get us out of the current situation. It is driving costs for families, in particular those who have to commute long distances every day to their houses, from Dublin right up the east coast and throughout the midlands. As we noted, our domestic economy is not improving. There is fantastic success on the export side of things and in research and development, but our domestic and retail economy and the ability of people to actually spend money is not improving, no matter what we do. There has been relief in some areas but overall retail sales continue to decline. One of the initiatives, or marks, of implementing this legislation would be to drive some element of confidence into that economy to release some money back into the retail economy, thereby increasing VAT receipts for the Minister and going partially towards the cost of the measure.
Presumably the Minister has based his excise tax projection on a certain level of where fuel costs were estimated to be at some stage during the year. In everybody's estimation fuel prices are currently far beyond anywhere anybody could have forecast, especially for petrol. Surely the excise excess the Minister is making from the increase in fuel prices should be taken back. That would be another way to go towards paying for the costs the Minister claimed we had not identified.
There is talk of a review group. I reiterate that this issue has been around for years and it is time we finally faced up to it. Fuel has been and remains one of the old reliables. Although there is an argument to be made for a tax on tobacco in terms of health, there is no argument in this case. There is also a growing issue in terms of laundered and illegal fuel coming across the Border. Pressure is put on local authorities who must maintain and clean up areas. I read that Monaghan County Council has to budget €1 million for cleaning sludge from roadsides and fields because of laundered fuel that is coming from the other side of the Border - or even under it - as a direct response to the current very high cost of legitimate fuel in this State. Laundered fuel, its impact on the economy and smuggling in general are issues we must discuss further in this Chamber. However, we have the ability to do something about the current level. If we could do that and take it on, we would immediately cut the legs from under those who sell laundered fuel into this economy, thereby increasing tax revenues again.
Rather than have the usual scenario of people saying, "No, we're not doing this", people should think outside the box. Given where our domestic economy is at, that is what is required. The old way of doing things is not going to happen. This would be a good way to start.
I thank all Members who contributed. I am sorry the debate was not slightly more constructive. To be constructive, Deputy Dooley could have shown me where to get the €174 million this measure would cost if I acceded to the request. In present circumstances, that is a lot of money in anyone's terms. At the time of the budget, petrol was 150 cent per litre and is now 170 cent, an increase of 20 cent. On budget night, there was no increase in excise but a 2% increase in VAT and an increase of €5 on a tonne of carbon. Of the 20 cent increase since the budget, less than 5 cent is attributable to taxes imposed by this Government. It is untrue to say the vast proportion of the price increase derives from tax increases.
Deputy Micheál Kitt referred to an article in The Irish Times but misquoted it. He said there had been an increase in recent months of over 20 cent due entirely to tax increases. The article said that, since 2008, tax increases contributed an increase of 20 cent to the price of a gallon of petrol. Of that, 5 cent was the work of this Government and the other 15 cent of the increase was the work of Fianna Fáil and the Green Party. I appreciate the conversion of the Fianna Fáil Party and the fact that it is addressing some of the damage it did. However, it has the same solution of throwing lumps of money it does not have at the problem.
The Minister has also made some conversions.
We cannot consistently spend more than we collect in revenue each year. It is not sustainable. It was suggested by some Opposition speakers yesterday evening that the Bill would provide a modest reduction in the price of fuel. The impact of this reduction would be far from modest in terms of the cost to the Exchequer as it is estimated at €178 million in a full year when VAT is taken into account. The loss of revenue would have a negative impact on the performance of our public finances, which is vital for economic well-being and to exiting the EU-IMF programme. Ireland has been running large public finance deficits since 2008 and this has driven up the country's debt level significantly.
I acknowledge that fuel prices are very high and I do not underestimate the significant additional financial burden this imposes on families and businesses. Ireland, as with other countries, has experienced a significant increase in the cost of petrol and auto diesel in recent years. There is general acceptance the increase in fuel prices is an international phenomenon. All sides of the debate have acknowledged that fuel prices are driven by factors largely outside our control, including the price of oil on international markets, exchange rates, production costs and refining costs. The rise in oil prices over recent periods reflects additional factors such as geopolitical uncertainty in north Africa and the Middle East, with potential supply disruptions.
Many of the contributors to this debate have raised the issue of fuel laundering and its impact on legitimate business, Exchequer tax returns and the environment. The Government will not tolerate such criminality. In addition to the ongoing enforcement action, legislative changes to enable more effective controls in this sector have been included in this year's Finance Act, including the introduction of new licensing requirements for marked fuel traders. The new arrangements will, for the first time, require any person dealing in marked fuel to hold a licence for the purpose. The granting of a licence will be subject to tax clearance requirements and the applicant will have to show Revenue that any conditions subject to which the licence may be granted will be complied with. Revenue will be empowered to revoke a licence if any of the licence conditions are breached. In other words, there will be traceability. At present, those supplying home fuel are not licensed and the sector is the source of laundered fuel. By making the sector traceable, so that every gallon can be traced from the port of import to the customer, we will contribute to cleaning up the system.
It is intended that the record keeping requirement will be strengthened, and that a new requirement to make periodic returns to Revenue will be introduced. All mineral oil traders, including traders in marked fuels, will have to make regular returns, electronically, detailing their fuel transactions. This will be an important new source of information on the supply chain for Revenue.
Steps are being taken, in close co-operation with the UK authorities, to acquire a more effective fuel marker. Revenue is planning to go to the market shortly, with the UK authorities, to seek a new marker. With cross-Border trade, there is no point in acting unilaterally; we must act with the British Government on this point. A good deal of preparatory research has been undertaken here and in the UK and we expect to proceed with the project shortly.
In the course of the debate Members from both sides of the House have referred to the particular difficulties encountered by the haulage sector. I appreciate the difficulties and a working group has been set up between officials from Revenue and from my Department. The group met this morning and has a few more meetings to hold. I hope a policy paper will be prepared with a view to some action being taken.
I remind the House that Fianna Fáil Ministers, in 2005 and 2008, subscribed to the Manchester protocol, an ECOFIN protocol providing that when there are spikes in fuel prices, no European Government will intervene to reduce prices for competitive reasons. That position has been held largely since then. We are bound by an agreement into which the Fianna Fáil Ministers entered in 2005 and reiterated in 2008. Just after Christmas, it was reiterated at an ECOFIN meeting I attended. We are somewhat tied but we may be able do something because I appreciate the difficulties for the haulage industry. It is crucial to our model of export-led growth because the people who haul goods to the ports or haul them across the Continent play a vital role in lifting the Irish economy.
Hear, hear.
I propose to share time with Deputies Michael Healy-Rae and Timmy Dooley. I thank Deputy Dooley for tabling this Bill, which gives us the opportunity to discuss many of the issues raised with Deputies on all sides of the House in recent weeks. This week I met the farm contractors association, IFA members and the Irish Road Hauliers Association. All had the same concern - the increasing cost of petrol and diesel - and in many cases they claim the increases are practically putting them out of business.
The Bill would provide for an immediate reduction in the excise duty on petrol and diesel of 4 cent per litre. Adding VAT to this amounts to a 5% reduction, which would be of major benefit to families travelling to work and bringing their children to school. In recent weeks, we have seen a reduction in the number of people attending GAA games. I do not blame the Minister for the whole problem but the cost of fuel and the high admission prices charged by the GAA are unhelpful. This area must be examined.
We also call for a review of fuel prices every three months instead of the current system of annual reviews. It does not make sense to review fuel prices once a year at budget time when the cost of oil on world markets changes all the time. The Minister should take up this point and try to introduce changes at ECOFIN meetings. The Minister is blaming Members on this side of the House for introducing it but I am sure he is capable of renegotiating.
In recent weeks I have received correspondence from some of the major hauliers in my county. I passed onto the Minister their concerns about the diesel price increase, from 83 cent per litre in March 2009 to €1.25 today, an increase of 50%, and the fact that laundered diesel is all over the country, which means legitimate hauliers cannot compete with carriers using illegal washed fuel. I welcome the fact the Minister will take action on laundered fuel and that he is working with the Government on the other side of the Border. It is a slow process and one that is causing a major loss of revenue to the State. It needs to be dealt with quickly.
Criminals, facilitated by the Government, are destroying the industry and the Government is standing idly by. The Government promotes and supports exports and has talked about a major increase in exports over the past number of years. At the same time, hauliers, who bring 95% of exports to the UK and Europe, are being crucified by fuel an motor taxes. Haulage prices are falling and companies and customers are renegotiating charges. Hauliers must also take into account the huge cost of fuel increases and many hauliers are going out of business. I noted that from the last document the haulage association sent to me, the number of haulage licences dropped by 1,300 in the past three years, representing a loss of approximately 10,000 jobs. This is a serious situation.
In fairness to the Irish Road Haulage Association, it has put forward solutions. The Minister has a working group in place and it is important that this group concludes its discussions and dialogue and comes up with solutions. If it does not, many more hauliers will go out of business. They are getting very impatient with the Minister at the slowness of the working group in producing its final report. I welcome the fact that the Minister said tonight that following a couple of more meetings he will bring forward solutions to the problems encountered by hauliers throughout the country. The Minister is aware of an EU directive that allows governments to support the haulage industry in their country and many countries in Europe do this and give an essential user rebate to hauliers in accordance with this directive. It is important the Government works on that.
As Deputy Kehoe knows, I worked in the oil business for approximately 15 years and I have a fair knowledge of how companies operate. It is well known that cartels and price fixing operate in the oil business. This begs the question whether, even allowing for the high cost of fuel on the world market, oil companies here are overcharging customers in Ireland. I believe they are. The Minister should ask the Competition Authority to investigate the operations of the oil industry in Ireland. For far too long, from national to local level, the industry has operated cartels within the industry. This is not in the best interest of the consumer. There is little competition and it is time the Competition Authority investigated the operations of the oil industry here.
I thank Deputy Dooley for bringing forward this Bill, which is sensible and much needed. For the past 22 years I have run a small retail fuel business and I know the business inside out. Since the price of fuel has sky-rocketed, I have noticed that people are economising and using less. Sales have reduced, which means the Government take must have fallen. The cost of fuel is also stopping people travelling, which stops people spending.
With regard to the effect of price increases on contracting, today we met with a new organisation representing agricultural contractors. People in the haulage and machinery hire businesses find the cost of fuel crippling because their rates have reduced over the past couple of years because of competition. There is so much competition for work that rates continue to reduce. However, fuel costs continue to rise. It is now takes €1,4000 worth of diesel to fill an articulated lorry with fuel. This is a significant amount of money. If it was half that price, it would be too much. This Bill should be supported by everybody here. We are talking here about a forced introduction of price increases. If a litre of diesel cost 75 cent at the pumps tomorrow morning, that would be plenty to pay. The Minister may laugh at that, but it is the truth.
Deputy Healy-Rae is doing better than Deputy Dooley. He was only taking 4 cent off.
I thank Fergal Blaney for pointing out that while leader of the Opposition, our now Taoiseach, Deputy Enda Kenny, urged the then Taoiseach, Brian Cowen, to consider using tax powers to reduce the soaring price of fuel for motorists. He said at the time that he was disappointed that the then Taoiseach did not have an initiative with regard to the mix of excise duties and VAT to ensure that they were not used as a further battering ram against the hard pressed consumer. At that time a litre of fuel was €1.32. Is it not amazing how a person can change his mind? It is a very short journey from this side of the House to the other side, but it is amazing how a person's mind and outlook on everything can change so much when he crosses that short distance.
The Deputy's father supported that.
Deputy Kehoe came into the House previously and told lies in the House and had to apologise for that. If he wants to talk now, perhaps he wants to tell a few more lies. He told lies in the Chamber but he withdrew what he said. However, I will not waste my time on that.
The Deputy should withdraw the charge of lying.
He did lie. He came into the Chamber and told lies.
The Deputy should withdraw that remark.
Not at all. I cannot withdraw it, because it is a fact.
The Deputy should withdraw the remark.
Okay, sorry. He came into the Chamber and told an untruth. Then he came in a week or two later and withdrew the untruth.
I ask the Deputy to withdraw the charge. If not, he should resume his seat.
Is it the charge of lying?
Yes. That is the practice in the House.
Is it okay to say he told an untruth?
That is not acceptable.
Well he did.
The Deputy knows that is not acceptable.
He did, but he withdrew it afterwards.
Is the Deputy going to withdraw the charge?
If the Chair wants me to withdraw it. He did do it, but I will withdraw the charge if the Chair wants me to.
I want the Deputy to withdraw it.
I withdraw it, but he did do it. I want to thank him - I was not here at the time - for his apology at the time and his correction of what he stated, which was incorrect.
I support the Bill before us. The hard pressed motorists of Ireland will look at us tonight to see who will do the right thing and vote for the proposal put forward by Deputy Dooley.
I welcome the opportunity to conclude this debate and I thank all who contributed. The majority of those who contributed, from all sides, made constructive suggestions. They recognised what I and the Fianna Fáil party are trying to achieve through this Bill. Some people sought to score political points and that is understandable.
We have all been contacted by motorists in recent weeks about the change in the price of oil and the continued increases. There are grave concerns in that regard and we recognise the impact the increases have on small businesses, the haulage sector and on hard pressed motorists, many of whom are put to the pin of their collar and many of whom find it difficult to put food on the table. It is not appropriate for a government to cast the issue aside and say it cannot look at it. Nor is it appropriate to say that it is on account of a spike in international oil prices and that people should suck it up and get on with it and that they have no choice but to accept it because we signed up to a protocol. I accept that previous governments signed up to the Manchester protocol. This was reaffirmed by the Minister. That was done when oil prices were much lower, when the economy had an element of growth and when things were going reasonably well.
People's backs are to the wall now and unless we are prepared to accept that and to recognise the impact the continued increase in international oil prices is having on them, we are learning nothing. The Minister said yesterday that Fianna Fáil was living with dreamland economics. I was somewhat chuffed by that, because the Minister reserves such comments for times when he is cornered on an issue to help him move beyond the situation. Notwithstanding that, if the Minister believes that, I suggest he was somewhat in dreamland last week when he came into the House and explained on a Topical Issue matter that the increased VAT yield was somewhat of a misnomer. When speaking about the yield from VAT per litre of fuel, he said that VAT is set as a percentage of the price increase as the price of fuel increases. However, he went on to say that in this regard it should be borne in mind that to the extent that spending in the economy is reallocated to petrol and other oil products and away from other VAT spending, and to the extent that the overall level of economic activity is reduced by higher oil prices, there may be little or no net gain to the Exchequer.
The Minister studied mathematics and surely the converse is also true, that a reduction in tax on oil will increase the spend in other areas of the economy, with little or no reduction in the take to the State. I believe a reduction in tax would generate income in a more labour intensive area of the economy, particularly in the retail sector, and that it would have a much greater benefit to the economy. This belief is not just based on the converse argument. The Minister may be familiar with a study carried out in the United Kingdom by the Fair Fuel Campaign. That study indicated that a 2.5 p reduction in the price of a litre of oil would see an increase of 0.32% in GDP in the first year and 0.34% over five years.
I am not suggesting there is a direct correlation between the two economies as they are somewhat different in character but when those figures are extrapolated it shows a gain of €750 million in GDP. A few people in this House were confused as to how we might pay for it. In my view, that would pay for it as there is a stimulus component as well as the increase in VAT which the Minister of State, Deputy John Perry, last night, seemed to indicate that there was no potential increase in the VAT based on the increase in the base price. However, he said in the House the previous week that the gain is in excess of €1 million per week, due to the increase in VAT. Last night he tried to wriggle out by saying it was said in response to a remark from the other side of the House. He is good at telling people what they want to hear. These were his own words and I wish to correct the record of the House so that we are all clear.
I am disappointed that Deputy Tom Hayes is not in the House because he accused me of having a brass neck and he proposed me for an end of the year award. Deputy Hayes has some brass neck himself because he fails to recognise what my good friend, Deputy Michael Healy-Rae had said, that the Taoiseach when he was on this side of the House said he was disappointed that the then Taoiseach, Brian Cowen, did not have an initiative with regard to the mix of excise duties and VAT to ensure that they are not used as a further battering ram against the hard-pressed motorist. Deputy Hayes seems to have changed his mind so I am not really sure where he stands on what the Taoiseach said when in opposition. I am not really sure where he stood during a debate between Deputy Richard Bruton and Deputy Enda Kenny either but maybe it is obvious now.
I acknowledge the good support my Bill has received from most of the Sinn Féin Deputies who spoke last night and who clearly understood the issue-----
I would worry about that.
Unfortunately, Deputy Tóibín did not. He is clearly upset that a new Fianna Fáil Front Bench might look at a problem in a different way when circumstances are different, when oil prices are higher. Fianna Fáil did increase tax at a time when it was possible to do so, when the base price was much lower and at a time when when fuel was much cheaper. However, that does not preclude us from understanding that when prices sky-rocket it is necessary for the Government to intervene. Deputy Tóibín seems to believe that my colleagues and I are bound to the history of our party. I have news for him; we will address the situation as we see it at a particular time and we will bring forward proposals that are appropriate -----
I will second the brass neck award.
-----and I argue that Deputy Tóibín should listen to seasoned politicians like Deputy Ó Caoláin and many others in Sinn Féin who understand that. He was the only one who failed to grasp the issue from our perspective. He even lectured Deputy McCarthy when he suggested to him that he should get a copy of a book which is readily available in Easons called, Constitutional Politics for Idiots. Deputy McCarthy did not over-react but I suggest that Deputy Tóibín should pick up a copy of that book the next time he is in Easons and understand how constitutional politics work.
In conclusion, I recommend that he pick up a few more books in Easons and perhaps he could trace back his own party history before he starts lecturing me or my front bench on where we stand or what we did in the past. I have great respect for the people who have walked a different path in Sinn Féin and are now embracing constitutional politics. There are some very fine people there. It ill behoves Deputy Tóibín to come in here and score cheap political points by firing scuds at us. He would be as well moving away from the firing of scuds now and get down to working on behalf of the people who elected him and elected us. We will bring forward appropriate policies as we see fit to meet the needs of the Irish people and we will not spend our time looking back. I am not suggesting that he or his party should either. They have a mandate just like we have and we have a mandate to work constructively for the Irish people. I also reject this notion that somehow we are being populist. If I wanted to be populist on fuel prices I would have gone for 50 cent or for more but I did not. We brought forward a worked solution, one which is self-financing and will help in a small way at a time when oil prices are in extreme circumstances. The Labour Party has a problem with this because it largely represents urban communities where they have public transport. Deputy Kevin Humphreys referred to the populism of Fianna Fáil. He has a Luas, the DART and a bus garage in his constituency. There are many constituencies that do not have the same access to public transport and I would much prefer if he was prepared to recognise that he has a mandate to represent all the people of Ireland and not just those in his constituency.
Question put:
The Dáil divided: Tá, 45; Níl, 86.
Tá
- Adams, Gerry.
- Boyd Barrett, Richard.
- Browne, John.
- Calleary, Dara.
- Collins, Joan.
- Collins, Niall.
- Colreavy, Michael.
- Crowe, Seán.
- Daly, Clare.
- Donnelly, Stephen S.
- Dooley, Timmy.
- Ellis, Dessie.
- Ferris, Martin.
- Flanagan, Luke ‘Ming’.
- Fleming, Sean.
- Fleming, Tom.
- Grealish, Noel.
- Halligan, John.
- Healy, Seamus.
- Healy-Rae, Michael.
- Kelleher, Billy.
- Kirk, Seamus.
- Kitt, Michael P.
- Lowry, Michael.
- Mac Lochlainn, Pádraig.
- McConalogue, Charlie.
- McDonald, Mary Lou.
- McGrath, Finian.
- McGrath, Mattie.
- McGrath, Michael.
- McGuinness, John.
- McLellan, Sandra.
- Martin, MIcheál.
- Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.
- Ó Cuív, Éamon.
- Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.
- Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.
- O’Brien, Jonathan.
- O’Dea, Willie.
- Ross, Shane.
- Smith, Brendan.
- Stanley, Brian.
- Tóibín, Peadar.
- Troy, Robert.
- Wallace, Mick.
Níl
- Bannon, James.
- Barry, Tom.
- Breen, Pat.
- Broughan, Thomas P.
- Burton, Joan.
- Butler, Ray.
- Buttimer, Jerry.
- Byrne, Catherine.
- Byrne, Eric.
- Carey, Joe.
- Coffey, Paudie.
- Collins, Áine.
- Conaghan, Michael.
- Connaughton, Paul J.
- Conway, Ciara.
- Coonan, Noel.
- Corcoran Kennedy, Marcella.
- Costello, Joe.
- Coveney, Simon.
- Creed, Michael.
- Daly, Jim.
- Deenihan, Jimmy.
- Doherty, Regina.
- Donohoe, Paschal.
- Dowds, Robert.
- Doyle, Andrew.
- Durkan, Bernard J.
- English, Damien.
- Farrell, Alan.
- Feighan, Frank.
- Fitzgerald, Frances.
- Fitzpatrick, Peter.
- Flanagan, Charles.
- Flanagan, Terence.
- Griffin, Brendan.
- Hannigan, Dominic.
- Harrington, Noel.
- Harris, Simon.
- Hayes, Tom.
- Humphreys, Heather.
- Humphreys, Kevin.
- Keating, Derek.
- Keaveney, Colm.
- Kehoe, Paul.
- Kelly, Alan.
- Kenny, Seán.
- Lynch, Ciarán.
- Lyons, John.
- McCarthy, Michael.
- McEntee, Shane.
- McFadden, Nicky.
- McHugh, Joe.
- McLoughlin, Tony.
- Maloney, Eamonn.
- Mathews, Peter.
- Mitchell O’Connor, Mary.
- Mulherin, Michelle.
- Murphy, Dara.
- Murphy, Eoghan.
- Nash, Gerald.
- Neville, Dan.
- Nolan, Derek.
- Noonan, Michael.
- Nulty, Patrick.
- Ó Ríordáin, Aodhán.
- O’Donnell, Kieran.
- O’Donovan, Patrick.
- O’Dowd, Fergus.
- O’Mahony, John.
- O’Sullivan, Jan.
- Penrose, Willie.
- Perry, John.
- Phelan, Ann.
- Reilly, James.
- Ring, Michael.
- Ryan, Brendan.
- Shortall, Róisín.
- Spring, Arthur.
- Stagg, Emmet.
- Stanton, David.
- Timmins, Billy.
- Tuffy, Joanna.
- Varadkar, Leo.
- Wall, Jack.
- Walsh, Brian.
- White, Alex.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Dara Calleary and Seán Ó Fearghaíl; Níl, Deputies Emmet Stagg and Paul Kehoe.
Question declared lost.