Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 20 Oct 2016

Vol. 925 No. 3

Financial Resolution No. 2: General (Resumed)

Debate resumed on the following motion:
THAT it is expedient to amend the law relating to inland revenue (including value-added tax and excise) and to make further provision in connection with finance.
- (Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade).

I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak on the budget, albeit a week after the budget was passed. I understand that in times gone by it was common for the budget debate to span many weeks. Perhaps the fizz has gone out of the bottle somewhat since the weeks before the budget have become the time for the primary debate rather than the weeks afterwards. There are few surprises on budget day that have not been flagged in advance and focus groups tested. Some items are withdrawn and added before and after the budget. This is the first budget adopted in what is termed a time of new politics. I welcome the new politics and I find it normal and democratic. The old days of winner takes all and an absolutist rule by a majority Government do not reflect a fair exercise of the mandate of 158 Deputies elected to the Chamber. Although the last Government had the biggest majority in the history of the State, few would suggest it was a good Government, as last February's election showed. For decades in the North of Ireland we saw how an inbuilt majority could scupper every piece of legislation from the other side of the House. In 40 years of Stormont, the only piece of Nationalist legislation to be passed was the Wild Birds Protection (Northern Ireland) Act 1931.

Minority governments are commonplace across Europe. Recently, I was privileged to visit the Danish Parliament with the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment. The Danish Government serves with only one third of the seats in the Parliament. Our near neighbour, the National Assembly for Wales, also has a minority arrangement. Earlier this year, after our Government had been formed but before the Welsh Government had, it studied the confidence and supply arrangement which we have in place for guidance. I hope it was of some assistance. The Scottish and many other parliaments also have such arrangements. However, some Dáil Members struggle with our new arrangements. Some show withdrawal symptoms from the overly adversarial days of the past. Some seem to seek the Punch and Judy show and a binary arrangement in which one side must lose in order for the other side to win, including some in the media, some Deputies and some Ministers.

I was struck, in particular, by the performance of the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Ross, last week when he devoted most of his allocated speaking time for his Department's brief to engage in scathing invective in respect of my party. His origins are in the Fine Gael Party and perhaps he has gone native or reverted to type with the increased zeal of the convert.

In any event, that episode and the new reality remind me of debates in the early days of democracy, with the gradual realisation that peace was preferable to war and pooling sovereignty delivered better results. Early political philosophers such as Locke, Hobbes and Rousseau rejected the idea that the state of nature is a state of war and moved on from that. They also noted that, in the absence of co-operation, life in the wild is not attractive. Life or, as in this case, ministerial careers or Government terms could, in the word's of Locke, be "poor, nasty, brutish, and short". However, we have moved on.

Turning to the substance of the budget, just one and a half of the 12 minutes for which the Minister, Deputy Ross, spoke on the budget were devoted to his brief. The remainder of his contribution was partisan in nature. Perhaps that is because only three pages of the 207-page public expenditure document contain details on transport issues. The Minister had nothing about which to talk. In the three pages on transport, there are two sections on roads projects, although little detail is provided, and one short section on public transport, which principally consists of re-announcing pre-flagged Luas works that are already under way. Considering the importance of climate action to this House and the world in general and in view of the gridlock which sometimes surrounds this city and which is worsening as the economy - thankfully - begins a slow recovery, the paucity of any big picture, or even a small one, in respect of public transport planning in the budget is shocking.

The greater Dublin area strategy for the next 30 years was announced during the election interregnum but there is no hint of it within the budget. My constituency of Kildare North is the home of the commuter belt, with tens of thousands of people travelling daily from towns such as Sallins, Naas, Clane, Kilcock, Celbridge, Maynooth and Leixlip by multiple modes of transport. However, the infrastructure needed to support them, make their lives easier and commutes shorter and increase their quality of life and work options is not being provided. Where in this budget is there any provision for the interconnector rail tunnel, the much-needed metro, a new circle line, the next Luas extensions, the electrification of rail lines, the extension of quality bus corridors or incentives to promote cycling, pedestrianisation, connectivity and wider forms of sustainable transport? There is none. Despite the Minister sneering during last week's speech about the metro being on the way, it is not happening. If the Minister of State read the detail of the budget, he would see that not a single cent can be spent on the metro - not even on an investigation - in all of 2017. That is not to mention multiple road schemes - such as the critical Sallins bypass, M7 widening in my constituency and many related projects - that are not flagged at all.

There are few new measures in the energy and environmental provisions. Some colleagues on the left have highlighted that there is no apparent money to wind down Irish Water. Apart from the never-ending debate on whether we should pay for water, is it not time for us to decide what to do with Irish Water? There needs to be a little imagination in this regard.

Energy in Ireland is lost wholesale as power plants, factories and many other heat sources literally pump power into nearby watercourses instead of usefully capturing it. So much heat is poured down the drain or pumped into the River Liffey, the temperature of which is 7o Celsius higher than it should be for a river of its size. There are more innovative solutions across Europe. For example, district heating captures excess heat and water and pumps them directly into households as a form of heating, comprising one third of the energy mix. These and many other innovative solutions could and should be explored instead of interminably debating costs and charging. Let us decide what we will do about this situation.

Turning to jobs and enterprise, the greatest challenge facing this island now and for the foreseeable future is Brexit. Many claims were made in advance about how the budget would be Brexit-proof and would contain many measures to address the situation. However, there are precious few. Brexit is the greatest challenge we face. In the coming 12 months, which will be the lifetime of this budget, many decisions will be made in British boardrooms and institutions on whether they will relocate or stay put. With a little bit of creativity, we could have had a Brexit package that included a number of measures to target and attract foreign direct investment to our shores, for example, a work visa programme, office space, fast-tracking inquiries of interest, share ownership packages for employees who were relocating, transport infrastructure and the well-rehearsed arguments on accommodation, energy and quality-of-life issues. Our personal taxation rate is comparable with the rest of Europe, if on the high side, but we do not enjoy the services that other countries do. As to capital gains tax for entrepreneurs, it is 10% under the €1 million threshold. This is welcome, but the UK's 10% threshold is £10 million. This makes it more difficult to relocate capital to Ireland.

Brexit offers opportunities but there has been a lack of imagination in that regard. The same can be said in terms of energy and climate action. I hope that these issues and those relating to transport will be addressed because they are critical.

In May, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael came to an agreement to enable the formation of a Fine Gael-led minority Government. As part of this arrangement, Fianna Fáil committed to facilitating the passage of three budgets, subject to progress being achieved on a number of our core policy priorities. In taking a responsible approach to government formation, Fianna Fáil, unlike many other political parties in the Dáil, has sought to ensure that the needs of the people who voted for us last February are reflected in the annual budget.

The budgets of the previous Fine Gael-Labour Government were repeatedly found by the ESRI to be regressive. A core objective of Fianna Fáil in entering into the current confidence-and-supply arrangement was to ensure that budgetary policy was reshaped in the direction of fairness. Under this agreement, we secured a commitment that available resources would be allocated on the basis of at least a 2-1 split in favour of public spending over tax cuts. This has been exceeded in budget 2017 with a 3-1 split between spending on services and investing in our citizens at every stage of the life cycle and reduced taxation.

Despite these improvements, this is not a Fianna Fáil budget and we did not get everything we wanted. However, we have secured a major departure from the policies of the previous Fine Gael-Labour Government and considerable progress on a number of our core policy objectives. The confidence and supply agreement has underpinned a shift in budgetary policy by moving away from a policy of tax cuts that result in the greatest gains going to the well-off in favour of a greater emphasis on investment in key public services, increases in social welfare payments and helping families with the cost of living.

Despite the relatively limited scope for increased public spending and reduced taxes, this budget will bring some relief to hard-pressed families. The reduction in the first three rates of USC by 0.5% is consistent with Fianna Fáil's pre-election commitment to reduce the burden of this tax on low and middle-income earners. This will ensure that working people will see some of the benefits of a growing economy reflected in a modest improvement in their disposable incomes.

Self-employed people often find themselves paying more in tax than a PAYE worker earning the same amount in income. The increase in the earned income tax credit for the self-employed to €950 represents an important move towards the eventual equalisation of the tax treatment of the self-employed with PAYE workers. It is to be hoped that further progress towards full equalisation will be realised in future budgets.

Securing greater investment in third level education was a key objective for Fianna Fáil in the budget negotiations. Therefore, we welcome the increase of €36.5 million in funding for higher education in 2017. However, the increased resources provided in the budget can only be seen as first step, particularly as many of those involved in the sector have stated that third level requires an additional €100 million per year in investment and in light of the long-term funding challenges set out in the recent Cassells report.

While the additional funding for social housing announced in the budget is to be welcomed, there is a need to develop a concrete strategy to underpin the significant and necessary expansion in social housing provision. There is a concern as to whether local authorities have the capacity to deliver on social housing targets. In light of the limited output on the part of local authorities in recent years, additional staffing and expertise may be required to drive the substantial increase in output.

The low level of investment in public transport is disappointing, especially in view of the increase in passenger numbers on bus, rail and Luas services owing to increasing numbers of people returning to employment as the economy continues to improve. My colleague, Deputy Lawless, referred to this matter. It is regrettable that budget 2017 does not provide any capital investment to progress key public transport projects such as metro north and the DART expansion programme.

The level of investment in public transport in Dublin must be increased significantly, particularly when we consider that per capita spending on transport here is considerably below that enjoyed by London and Manchester, cities we compete with for foreign direct investment and jobs.

Fianna Fáil does not agree with every measure contained in the budget. Home ownership is an important objective of public policy. As such, we included in our election manifesto a proposal for a deposit saving scheme to assist first-time buyers to reach the deposit needed to purchase a home. Several experts have given their view that the first-time buyer's tax rebate announced in the budget will do little to stimulate the much-needed increase in supply but will, instead, serve only to drive up house prices further. Given the uncertainty surrounding the impact of this measure, it is necessary to carry out an independent assessment of the likely implications of the tax rebate on the housing market. I understood a number of changes in the scheme have already been agreed for implementation in the Finance Bill.

The budget will see an increase of €5 per week in core welfare payments. Under the confidence and supply arrangement, Fianna Fáil secured agreement on increases to the State pension. We also welcome the increases in weekly welfare payments to carers, the disabled and the unemployed. Excluding the State pension, these represent the first increases in weekly welfare rates since 2009 and will go some way to ensuring the social welfare payments these groups depend on to maintain their income keep pace with the modest inflation that has occurred over the past seven years.

Will the Minister of State, Deputy Stanton, confirm in his response whether the Finance Bill has already been published? A great amount of detail about it was given on "Morning Ireland" earlier, with reference in particular to changes to the housing tax relief scheme. I have been waiting three and a half days for an opportunity to speak in this House on the budget measures only to discover that the Bill to effect their implementation may already have been published. It would be the height of disrespect to Members to have measures finalised before the debate on them concludes. I notice, too, that if the Central Bank makes a recommendation, it will generally be taken on board, but not a blind bit of notice is taken of recommendations from Members.

Regarding the tax relief for first-time buyers, I am concerned that the provision whereby eligibility reverts back to the first mortgage drawdown will impact negatively on people who build their own homes. In other words, first-time buyers who are about to move into their self-build home having drawn down the last tranche of their mortgage will not qualify. That is unfair. The last drawdown should be the defining criterion according to which a first-time buyer qualifies or does not qualify for the scheme. As it stands, the provision reverts back to July of this year. I hope that will be changed so that anybody who has a last drawdown after July will qualify. In the case of self-builds, it is only when the last mortgage drawdown is complete that people can move into their home. I will be pushing for that change and have already spoken to my party's finance spokesman, Deputy Michael McGrath, about it.

I welcome the modest increases in welfare payments provided for in the budget. However, there is a real sense that the disability sector has been let down by budget 2017. It should be a priority in future budgets that the sector receives special treatment. We have a Minister of State with a specific interest in disabilities and I hope that is reflected in future provision. The measures to assist the sector are welcome but underwhelming.

My colleague mentioned funding for roads, which is under the remit of the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Shane Ross. Together with several colleagues, I recently brought forward a Topical Issue matter requesting that funding for local improvement schemes be recommenced in 2017. The Minister stated clearly in his reply that this would be done. I hope that promise will be adhered to because it is very important for those of us living in rural areas.

In regard to the rent allowance, I have brought to the attention of the Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Leo Varadkar, and the Minister for Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government, Deputy Simon Coveney, that the increases in Kerry were in the region of 5% while the increases in other counties were upwards of 15% to 20%. I compared Kerry and Galway as being two very similar counties in terms of population, size, tourism and so on. The daft.ie report for the first quarter of 2016 gives the average rent in Kerry as €623, with a corresponding figure for Galway of €618. However, the rent allowance increases in Galway were substantially greater. When I checked last Friday on daft.ie, six properties were available in Tralee, a town facilitating 30,000 people, all of which were outside the rent allowance boundaries. Something must be done to address this problem. Will the Minister of State instruct his officials to ring the relevant social welfare officers in Kerry to ask how they are dealing with the rent allowance crisis there? People cannot find a suitable qualifying property and the situation is getting worse week after week. Nobody seems to be listening to us.

I hope somebody in Government will take on board the points I have raised today. I hope, too, that the legislation is not already published, because that would mean my proposals have no chance of being taken on board.

Deputies Charlie McConalogue and Lisa Chambers will share time.

I welcome the opportunity to discuss this financial resolution. As my colleagues noted, Fianna Fáil has taken a very responsible approach in recent months, taking into account the challenges facing the country and the need for stable Government. We are aware, too, of what the alternatives to such an approach might be when we see what has happened in Spain, which still does not have a government despite the major challenges facing that country. We were keen to be in government following the election and fought hard for that outcome. Having accepted that we did not have the required support, we decided to seek to offer the most effective Opposition there has been in this House in the context of the unique circumstances that presented after the election.

We have taken the same approach to the budget, our concern being to ensure it was framed in a way that was significantly different from what was rejected by the public in the election and from the approach taken by the previous Government. Although that Administration had a difficult job to do in hard times, in carrying out that responsibility it placed the burden and pressure on the people who could least afford it. Our approach is very different from that of other parties and Independent Members on the Opposition benches. Despite having huffed and puffed for five years in the previous Dáil and having put themselves before the people and sought a mandate for their platform, when the opportunity arose to form a new Government, they headed for the hills and were nowhere to be found for several weeks or even months.

Anytime they were found, their sole contribution was to peep up and canvass for Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael to go into government, neglecting the platform and the canvass they had undertaken in the election campaign. A very dim view has been taken by many people who voted for them in terms of the value of the vote that they cast. Some members of the public will simply cast an opposition vote. I remember canvassing a person during the general election and fighting hard for his vote. He told me that he would not be able to vote for me on that occasion, despite the fact that he wanted to give me a number two. He said he was voting for another party but that he would never want that party to be in government. He said that its members were great at opposition and at shouting, so he was going to vote for them. He liked the way they shouted but he was not voting for them to go into government. Maybe they were true to that particular person's vote but that was the exception. People who actually voted for one party or another, or for an Independent, ultimately wanted to see the mandate they were giving to that person implemented in government. That is the approach that my party took. That is also the approach that the public wanted my party to take, as well as other parties who failed to live up their responsibilities and who continue to huff and puff now. They failed and showed their true colours because when they got the opportunity to take on responsibility, they would not do so.

Regarding the influence Fianna Fáil has brought to bear on this budget, the ESRI has shown that this is the first budget in the past five or six years which is progressive in nature and which gives the small benefits of the improving economy to those who most need them. That is the direction that has been taken although I would have a number of problems with many measures in the budget. Certainly, in terms of the steer of the budget, it is important that it is going in that direction. In several previous budgets under the last Government, the ratio of expenditure increases to tax reductions was 50:50. Indeed, in the first year that there was a little money available to spend, we saw the top rate of tax being reduced by 1%. That happened three budgets ago while at the same time there was massive pressure on our public services. In this particular budget, the expenditure to taxation ratio was 3:1. Furthermore, the tax measures are targeted at those who are most under pressure. The general thrust of this budget is a welcome departure and is starting to reflect the views of the public. Fianna Fáil is making every effort to exert whatever pressure it can to ensure that the fairness in public services that we seek to achieve is reflected in public policy, albeit from the Opposition benches.

As my party's spokesperson on agriculture, I wish to refer to a number of measures in the budget relevant to farming. There are some welcome measures in the budget, particularly the €25 million fund for a new sheep scheme. There has also been a welcome increase in the funding for the rural development programme, RDP. However, it must be pointed out that the form and record of the Government on the beef data and genomics programme, BDGP and the green low-carbon agri-environment scheme, GLAS, under the RDP, is not good. In both cases, we have seen an underspend over the past two years, which were the first two years of the reformed CAP programme. The upshot is that farmers have been missing out on much needed income. The uptake of those schemes was less than what was expected because the schemes were closed prematurely and there was also a delay in commencing them. Fianna Fáil will be pushing in every way possible to ensure that the RDP allocation is spent in full. We will also work to ensure that the aforementioned schemes are reopened and brought up to capacity. In respect of the BDGP in particular, we will seek to ensure, in the context of the underspend from the first two years, that a payment of €200 per cow is made to support our suckler herd, if at all possible. That is our objective in terms of the RDP underspend and the BDGP.

The loan fund is a new departure which will be welcomed by some. It is certainly something which, at EU Commission level, will be seen as a financial instrument that is available to farmers to deal with income volatility. However, it is crucial to ensure that it does not draw from single farm payments or from payments to the various agricultural schemes. While the loan facility is something that farmers will certainly avail of, particularly those who are under financial pressure, there must be a separate scheme or payment for the tillage industry. The Government has indicated in recent days that the loan fund should be the preferred avenue for providing support to tillage farmers, even those who have actually lost their crop this year. I would draw a very strong distinction between those farmers who have actually harvested their crops, although they are under pressure for the fourth year in a row, and those farmers who have not been able to harvest their crop. The former need our support but the latter are in a crisis situation. They have not gone away. They are still out there, dealing with the after effects of the very bad weather this year. They have either not harvested at all or if they have done so in the past few weeks, they have harvested a crop that is worthless. They do not have the cash flow or income to be able to meet their outgoings. This is not confined to specific parts of the country and affects only a minority of tillage farmers, but for them it is a crisis. If they are to be able to continue in the sector, the Government must provide an emergency or crisis fund to support them and to acknowledge the tremendous difficulty they find themselves in.

I wish to touch on the issue of the challenges facing the mushroom sector. The Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine met the EU Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development, Mr. Phil Hogan, this morning. My party spokesperson on horticulture and food, Deputy Jackie Cahill, raised the matter of the mushroom sector with the Commissioner. As a party, Fianna Fáil will continue to push this issue. The particular and very immediate pressure on the mushroom sector demands a response from Government to ensure that the sector can survive and pick up again. There is a good future for the mushroom industry in the longer term but it is under very significant pressure at the moment.

There are several other issues on which I look forward to achieving progress and following up.

I welcome this opportunity to contribute to the debate on budget 2017. There is no doubt that the budget was a test for the minority Government. It was a hurdle that had to be overcome but many in the media and the public generally thought that the Government would fall at this particular hurdle. I very much welcome the fact that we have come through this budget intact. It was an important point in terms of ensuring the stability of our Parliament, making sure that our country continues to be run properly and efficiently and that Parliament continues in situ. It also marks an important turning point in terms of how we conduct the budgetary process.

We will look back on this particular budget in years to come as a point in history when we really changed how we did our business and when things were done very differently in terms of how we put our budgets together. It is a huge privilege to have played a role in that, to have been here for that budget process and to see it completed. It will be fully completed in the next few weeks. In terms of the budget process in question, I sat on the new Committee on Budgetary Oversight, the first of its kind in this country. That committee allowed for cross-party influence and participation in the budget process, which is not the norm and which had never been done before. The idea behind that was to take away the big-bang effect of budget day and to ensure that there would be no surprises.

It was intended that when all parties came into the Chamber on the day of the budget announcement, they would have made an input into the budgetary process and would know what was contained in the budget for the coming year. It was intended that the public would be aware as well. The thinking behind this process was that it would give parliamentarians from across the board an opportunity to analyse the budget, to contribute to it and to critique it properly, rather than being landed on budget day with new measures they had no sight or sound of in advance. I think this is a welcome and positive transformation in the budget process. Although the amount of time available to the Select Committee on Arrangements for Budgetary Scrutiny was quite truncated this year, we had an opportunity to hear from the Minister and from many stakeholders and organisations that assist the Department of Finance in its deliberations. It was hugely helpful for the committee to have informative debates and discussions with the Economic and Social Research Institute, the Nevin Economic Research Institute, the Department of Finance and the Ministers, Deputies Donohoe and Noonan. One of the things I have taken from the process is the respect that was evident across the committee room for the differing views of Deputies from all parties and none. It was okay to have differing views on the matters being discussed. All views were taken on board and given due credit and credence. I think that marks a huge and positive change in how we conduct our business.

It is generally accepted by the public and in this House that the mark of Fianna Fáil can be seen on the budget and that the party's input is evident in the outcome of the budget. During the general election campaign earlier this year, we advocated very strongly for increased investment in public services to be prioritised over tax cuts at all times. We carried that perspective into the negotiations on our confidence and supply agreement with Fine Gael. It was at the heart of the interactions between Deputies Calleary and Michael McGrath and Deputies from the other side of the House during the budget negotiations. The outcome of that process can be seen in this budget. We pushed for a 2:1 split between expenditure increases and tax cuts, but we achieved a 3:1 split. That shows we have listened to the views of the public in this regard. The public did not want cuts in taxation to be imposed left, right and centre at the expense of good public services. They wanted the wriggle room that is available in the public finances for 2017 to be used to prioritise investment in public services that have been decimated in recent years. I am glad the budget reflects the will of the people, and the majority of Members of this House, in this respect. The Fianna Fáil Party is proud to have played an instrumental role in ensuring the achievement of a 3:1 split.

After the budget has been announced, we normally wait to see what the ESRI has to say about it as an independent body that analyses the effects of budgets on citizens. Although the increase in household spending power as a result of this budget will be modest and minimal, I am pleased that for the first time in many years, the benefits of a budget in terms of increased spending power will be felt by the lowest income earners, first and foremost. I think that represents a marked change on the past five or six budgets. It is extremely positive that this change has come about. I believe it can be attributed to the involvement of the Fianna Fáil Party in the budgetary process.

It was important to address a number of key issues in this budget. It was clear that we had to do something to help people to access affordable child care of an appropriate quality. I commend the Minister, Deputy Zappone, on the work she has done in this regard. I would also like to mention the contribution of my party's spokesperson on children and youth affairs, Deputy Anne Rabbitte, in this area. The child care measures in this budget amount to a start, but they do not address all of our concerns. This budget was never going to address all of our child care concerns, but it is a positive step. I welcome the Government's decision to invest money in allowing families to access affordable child care of a certain quality. We have a long way to go in that regard.

I welcome with caution the first-time buyers initiative. It has become increasingly difficult for people in my peer group in their 30s and 40s to buy their first family homes. The feeling among many such people is that buying a house is now out of their reach. They are concerned that they may never aspire to own their own homes. I am glad to see that this issue is on the minds of the Members of Dáil Éireann because it needs to be addressed so that the pressure on prospective house buyers can be alleviated. Having said that, I share some of the concerns about the incentive scheme that is being introduced. It seems to have already started to increase the price of new-build houses. It is clear that developers are aware that people are going to get tax rebates when they purchase new houses and are accordingly adding sums of money to their prices. We really need to have a look at this scheme. We should be open to reassessing it on an annual basis to ensure it continues to be fit for purpose. We should be willing to give it a chance and see whether it works and it does what we hope it will do.

It is important to remember that this was a modest budget. It was not a giveaway budget or a budget to fix all problems. When we speak in here or among the public, we should not be lauding ourselves for managing to find €5 to give to pensioners. While this increase is welcome, it is clear that €5 is not a lot of money. I do not think anybody who stands up in this Chamber should be hugely proud of giving €5 back to pensioners or other social welfare recipients. This modest amount of money is an indication of the direction in which we want to go as a country and an acknowledgement of the fact that the income and spending capability of pensioners, in particular, has diminished significantly in recent years. That has led to increased poverty, stress and anxiety among people who receive the State pension. While I welcome this positive initiative, I emphasise that we have much more to do in this regard. I am pleased that we have taken a step in the right direction by increasing the State pension.

I welcome the increased budget of €12 million in my own portfolio of defence. I understand some of that money will be spent on capital investment in our Defence Forces. It is worth noting that we have one of the lowest defence spends in the developed world. It represents 0.35% of GDP, which in a European context is an exceptionally low proportion of a country's overall budget to be assigned to defence. While I do not dispute that other pressing issues, such as the housing crisis, homelessness and health care, need to be addressed, I reiterate that if we are to have the properly functioning and professional Defence Forces we need, we must ensure they are properly funded. I have repeatedly reminded the Minister that Defence Forces numbers have decreased. We are now well below the 9,500 full-time serving members we are supposed to have. I have repeatedly asked the Minister to address this. I certainly believe some of that budget needs to be spent on addressing the numbers in our Defence Forces, which are continuing to decrease.

By any standards, last week's budget was a good one for this country in terms of the direction in which we are going and the policy changes we are making. As a country, we have refocused our efforts to ensure we have good public services, a fair society and a working economy. These are the priorities and clear objectives of any parliament. I welcome the fact that this budget, as I have said, benefits people on the lowest incomes first and foremost. I think it is one of the proudest aspects of the budget. I am pleased that the Fianna Fáil Party has made a valuable contribution in that regard.

Debate adjourned.
Top
Share