Financial Resolution No. 1: Tobacco Products Tax

I move:

(1) THAT for the purposes of the tax charged by virtue of section 72 of the Finance Act 2005 (No. 5 of 2005), that Act be amended, with effect as on and from 13 October 2021, by substituting the following for Schedule 2 to that Act (as amended by section 26 of the Finance Act 2020 (No. 26 of 2020)):

“SCHEDULE 2

Rates of Tobacco Products Tax

(With effect as on and from 13 October 2021)

Description of Product

Rate of Tax

Cigarettes …. .... .... …. …. …. …. ….

Rate of tax at —

(a) except where paragraph (b) applies, €383.42 per thousand together with an amount equal to 8.83 per cent of the price at which the cigarettes are sold by retail, or

(b) €434.19 per thousand in respect of cigarettes sold by retail where the rate of tax would be less than that rate had the rate been calculated in accordance with paragraph (a).

Cigars .... .... .... …. …. …. …. ….

Rate of tax at €434.496 per kilogram.

Fine-cut tobacco for the rolling of cigarettes ....

Rate of tax at €418.010 per kilogram.

Other smoking tobacco .... …. …. …. ….

Rate of tax at €301.434 per kilogram.

”.

(2) IT is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution shall have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act 1927 (No. 7 of 1927).

Financial Resolution No. 1 provides for excise duty increases on tobacco products with effect from midnight tonight. The increase amounts to 50 cent, inclusive of VAT, on a pack of 20 cigarettes in the most popular price category, together with pro rata increases in other tobacco products. The price of a pack of 20 cigarettes in the most popular pricing category, assuming the full increase is passed through to the final retail price, will increase to €15. The excise duty component of this price will be €8.99 and the total tax, inclusive of VAT, will be €11.80, which represents 78.65% of the price of a pack of 20 cigarettes. The pro rata increase on the price of a typical pouch of roll-your-own will increase by 70 cent to €21.20.

Ireland has been committed to a policy of taxing tobacco in order to encourage people to quit smoking, particularly younger people. Indeed, the policy is to encourage them not to start at all. The policy is working. In 2007, nearly 30% of people were daily smokers. By 2019, that figure had fallen to 14% and figures for younger people are lower still. Increasing tobacco products taxation is a significant public health policy measure to continue this downward trend in smoking rates in Ireland and help us to achieve a tobacco-free Ireland by 2025. In terms of revenue raising, the increase in tobacco products tax and the minimum excise duty is estimated to yield €56.4 million in a full year.

I move amendment No. 1:

In Schedule 2, inserted by paragraph (1), by the substitution of "€373.39" for "€383.42".

This amendment seeks to amend the 50 cent increase on tobacco to 30 cent, in line with our alternative budget proposals. Very importantly, this reflects the concerns that the Revenue Commissioners have already relayed to the Department of Finance. Essentially, we could reach a tipping point and excessive increases in excise duty could result in increased consumer purchasing from illicit sources and a decreased tax yield. The purpose of our amendment is to improve public health and increase revenue, but also, importantly, to avoid the consequences that Revenue has warned us about.

It should be noted that we will vote on this resolution tonight because the Government, despite the commitments the Tánaiste outlined in regard to a long-term strategy on tobacco prices, does not lock in through legislation such excise duties increases on an annual basis. It also does not legislate for locked-in social welfare, pension or minimum wage increases, for that matter. For no justifiable reason, it has legislated for an annual increase in the carbon tax up to 2030.

You are wandering now.

The matters are related.

The link is very tenuous.

The only difference that today's budget will bring to most workers and families is that their fuel and heating costs will increase again tonight. This very night petrol and diesel prices will increase again. The Government has been told that families are already struggling with energy and fuel hikes. This year energy companies have increased their prices 30 times. The price of a litre of petrol in a service station I stopped at this morning was €1.65, an absolutely crazy price for people who have no choice but to use their car to get to work.

Deputy, let me make a point please. You will be given the additional time. If I allow you to pursue this particular line, which is not in order, then every other Member present will be also entitled to do that. All of these matters will be discussed tomorrow and in subsequent days when the debates on the budget take place. We are now talking about a Financial Resolution in relation to tobacco.

I appreciate the leniency of the Ceann Comhairle. This is important because the change is happening at midnight tonight.

Of course it is important.

Families, the people who get up early in the morning, are struggling. They have already told the Government that they are struggling to meet housing and childcare costs. Today nothing was provided for them, except a further increase in the cost of getting to work. How out of touch can we be? It is scandalous that the Government did not have the guts to put the latest hike before the House for a vote this evening.

All I will say is that the people affected will take the first opportunity they get to vote on this matter and pass judgment on this out-of-touch Government.

I should have said that Financial Resolutions Nos. 1 to 6, inclusive, are related and will be discussed together. Financial Resolutions Nos. 2 to 6, inclusive, form a composite proposal.

Smoking is bad for you and it would be best that people did not smoke and that we did things to discourage them from smoking but punishing people financially for an addiction is not the way forward and is overwhelmingly a regressive form of taxation in that it disproportionately hits the less well-off. I also strongly doubt the Government will, certainly through this mechanism, get to a tobacco-free Ireland, but - and this is happening on a widespread basis already - those who continue to smoke will source cigarettes and tobacco illegally and potentially endanger their health to a greater degree because they will be buying products that are not properly regulated and are often mixed with dangerous substances or mislabelled as to what is really in them, pretending to be one product when they are something quite different in many cases. Therefore, I do not think this is the right approach. As I said, it ends up financially punishing in a pretty significant way people, who often are older or are on lower incomes, for an addiction they find difficult to shake.

It is worth commenting in that regard that if we are really serious about public health, why do we not resource our public health teams, which do things like public health education? They do not just deal with Covid pandemics. They are chronically understaffed and under-resourced all across the country. Why not give them the staffing and the resources necessary to wage a positive public health education campaign? That would be a far more effective and sensible way to try to encourage people, particularly young people, not to smoke. There are some recent reports that smoking levels among our younger population are beginning to pick up again despite the prices. There is no doubt they went down but there is some evidence they are starting to rise again. I do not support the measure. I think I will probably be fairly alone in making that point.

I will not make anything like a lengthy point on the other matter, which strays a bit from the Financial Resolutions. I will just say, briefly, that something that is not mentioned but should be mentioned is that the transport budget is down in the Estimates books. Being the nerd I am, I look at the Estimate books, and expenditure on transport, including public transport, is down in budget 2022. When the Government piles on carbon tax increases based on decisions made in previous budgets, it does so in the context of not giving the massive injection of investment in building public transport capacity that would give people a choice. It is very retrograde to do that because, again, it punishes people for something that is not really in their control. It is the lack of alternatives to the car that is the problem, so just punishing people with carbon taxes while reducing the amount of money that goes into transport and into public transport in particular, to my mind reeks of double standards and hypocrisy.

I too am opposed to this tax increase. I feel it will place undue hardship on people, especially those with mental health problems. They will tell you smoking is the only consolation they have. If you weigh it up, the extra money they will get in their social welfare payments would not even cover the cost of the extra 50 cent if they were to smoke a packet of cigarettes a day and maybe a couple more in the run of the week. The extra fiver will not go far in that regard. It will never stop those people from having or wanting to smoke. Many of them developed an addiction for cigarettes long before it became clear that it was harmful. We should try to do something in our schools by way of increased education about the harmfulness of smoking. As for the many people living alone who have this craving for cigarettes, it is unfair to suggest that this increase in the cost of a box of cigarettes would help them or make them think they should stop smoking. That is a fairly ridiculous suggestion. It is much the same as the carbon tax. People have to use fuel to get to work and for all the other things, and elderly people have to use fuel to keep themselves warm. Again, this is nonsensical and more thought should have been put into it. It will hurt people who have mental illness or maybe depression when that is all they can reach for or want to reach for when they are in a certain situation. Cigarettes are certainly expensive as it is, and adding 50 cent to the price of them will not stop people who love smoking. It is fairly ridiculous and I will not vote for this measure.

I will not support this price jump of 50 cent for a packet of cigarettes. I am probably one of the lucky people in this country who does not smoke, thankfully. I have many very close friends who smoke and I have spoken to them at length to try to see if they might give it up, and they are finding it very difficult. We need to look at educating people in some way, not punishing them. Maybe we could start at a very young age because it is at a very young age that many people start smoking. Punishing them in the pocket might be the way the Government wants to do it. I feel that that is only a tax-raising exercise. It is €56.4 million, I think the Minister said at the beginning. That is a lot of tax revenue. Of course, it is a popular tax to throw on people and the Government will not get too much criticism, but somebody has to give the other side for the smoker, and it is maybe best that I be one of those people because I do not smoke but I do understand the difficulties of people who smoke and who find it difficult to give it up. It is a comfort to them. More people - ordinary, everyday people like us - are at home and finding it difficult and an anxious time and a cigarette tends to relax them. If that is what it takes, that is what it takes. It is very easy for us just to throw on 50 cent to the price. Every time there is a budget it is 50 cent or a euro or whatever along the line, taking the price of a packet of cigarettes to €15. It is time to stop. It is an unfair move. I do not agree with any price increase whatsoever. It is time to take a step back and come at this from a different angle. Maybe an expert group should be set up to do that, rather than the Government just hanging on until the next budget, throwing another 50 cent on a packet and saying that will do the trick; it will not. As previous speakers have said, more people are turning to smoking, so this obviously has not worked. Then, of course, we may be heading towards illegal cigarettes in this country.

It is a big worry, and it is something that should be stamped out. If we keep going the road we are going, however, that industry will grow.

For the man or woman who likes a smoke, he or she will get hit one way pulling up at the filling station tomorrow morning. For the smokers who put on the heating tomorrow evening when they go to bed, they will get hit another way. If they sit down for a cigarette, they will be hit yet another way. Whatever benefits they are getting out of this budget, they are surely getting hammered left, right and centre in other ways. Obviously, some people who smoke do not have mental health issues but a large number of them do. Sometimes a cigarette is a small thing people can take to help them get through the day. This budget puts cigarettes out of some people's price range and makes life far more difficult than it should be for them. As I said, I did not support a similar measure last year and I will not support this one. Somebody needs to speak up for the ordinary people who struggle and need a packet of cigarettes a day to keep themselves ticking over in society. For people who find themselves in a lot of difficulty, smoking is sometimes a way of relaxing. I certainly will not refuse them that.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this important issue. It is the populist thing to say that nobody should smoke. I agree with that insofar as it would be better if young people never tried it. That would be way better for themselves and for the health of the nation. However, there is such a thing as becoming a nanny state and trying to direct people's lives. There is a great difference between trying to assist people and trying to get up on their back altogether. When the Government says it wants Ireland to be completely smoke-free by 2025 or something like that, I do not agree with it because there is such a thing as freedom of choice. It is not that long since there was a referendum in this country where all the talk was about "my body, my choice" and people will do what they wish. That was the way it was, there was a vote on it and we had to respect that. However, the Government is now telling people it does not want them to smoke and it will try its best to price smoking out of existence.

Every time there has been a proposal for an increase in the price of tobacco products, I have voted against it, simply because I do not believe I have the right to tax somebody else's habit. You can call it an addiction but there are people who know exactly what they are doing. Yes, they are addicted, but they also enjoy it. It is like a person having a drink. There is nothing in the world wrong with people having a drink provided they try to do it in moderation. Of course, it would be better if nobody smoked at all, but who are we to tell people what they should do? I know many people, including friends of mine and people I represent, who smoke. I do not think we have a right to put an extra 50 cent cost on them tonight and tell them the reason they are being hurt in the pocket is that it is for their own good.

We all know what is happening with tobacco products. You need only walk five minutes beyond the front of this building before you are able to buy all the illegally sold cigarettes you would like. The Government will take no tax on these. There are shadowy types of people selling those cigarettes and using the funds for other illegal activities. What are we doing only driving ordinary, honest people to go to those sellers when they see the Government putting ever-rising taxes on their habit? I just do not agree with it, and I think we are going down the wrong road completely.

Of course I appreciate the campaigns by the Minister for Health and previous Ministers on how to break a smoking addiction and the public health awareness campaigns to try to stop people smoking. That is a different thing. Going after the money is a crude instrument. There are housewives, men going to work and people in hospitals who desperately want their cigarette. It is their thing. After their dinner, they want a cigarette with their cup of tea. Life is very short. It is not right for us to be playing with people's lives to the degree of saying, "Right, cigarettes are bad, so we are going to put them up by 50 cent again tonight." The cost of living has gone up enough with all the other bills we have been talking about today. The increase in the price of fuel is going to have a knock-on effect on the cost of every item that is transported on our roads. The cost of electricity, home heating oil and everything else has gone up significantly and now we are hitting smokers with another 50 cent on their habit. I do not agree with it and I do not support it. I listened very carefully to what Deputy Carthy said about having an increase of 30 cent instead. I would rather see a rise of 30 cent than 50 cent, but what I would really like to see is the price being left alone.

Given the number of people who smoke and the numbers of cigarettes manufactured, does the Tánaiste, as a doctor, know what actually goes into these products? Do people understand how dangerous cigarettes are? It really annoys me that people can go anywhere at this time and find contraband products available. What is the difference between legal and illegal cigarettes? As a member of the health committee some years ago, when we asked people who appeared before us this question, nobody seemed to be able to tell us what actually goes into cigarettes. Whatever it is, it is very bad.

What is the amount of money involved in treating smokers? Thanks be to God, I do not smoke. We should be trying to encourage people to go off cigarettes. Most of those who smoke do not want to keep smoking and want help to stop. Is there any chance that the money that will be raised from the extra 50 cent being put on the cost of a pack of cigarettes from midnight could be used to help people to break the habit? Smoking is an addiction and many people want help to overcome it.

I have listened to Members criticising the budget. It is a good budget. In fact, it is really hard to find anything wrong with it. In fairness, the Government has ticked every box and dotted all the i's. The problem of smoking is not going to go away. There are large numbers of people in hospital and dying from smoking-related disease, including young people who will leave young families behind them. I am saying we should do something good with this budget by doing something decent with the 50 cent increase. The income it creates will amount not to thousands or hundreds of thousands but millions of euro. There is a possibility to see whether we can do something to try, once and for all, to deal with this issue. The moneys raised could be used for research and to help people.

As I said, I do not know what goes into a cigarette. I smoked one cigarette in my life, behind one of the classrooms in school, because I wanted to be popular with my friends. I took a puff and, thanks be to God, found it absolutely dreadful. This is a good budget and it would be even better if we could use it to help people who want to stop smoking. We must do something serious to deal with smuggling and the illegal trade in tobacco. If we do not know what is in legal cigarettes, how can we know what is going into the illegal ones?

I am a reformed smoker who has been off the cigarettes since May 1994. I remember the date because it was a big choice for me to make. I was 24 years of age and smoked up to 40 Rothmans a day. Rothmans were a hard fag. I made the choice to give them up; in fact, the price of them made the decision for me, even though, at that time, they were a lot cheaper than they are today.

I have friends who smoke. Do they know the consequences of smoking? Yes, they do. All we heard for many years was that you will get cancer and other things from smoking. Everything was down to smoking. Maybe you will and maybe you will not. There are many people in this country who got cancer without ever having smoked, or even drank, in their lives. Branding smoking in that way is an issue for me. Telling people that smoking may cause cancer is right.

However, people know the consequences. The consequences are shown in the pictures on packets of cigarettes. The Government asked people to leave pubs and public areas if they wish to smoke and that was the right decision because it gave people who wanted to have a cigarette the choice to go outside or elsewhere to do so. There are people in this Chamber who walk outside every day to have a cigarette, where they do not interfere with the health of any person other than themselves. Will putting 50 cents on the price of a packet of cigarettes change their mind? It will not. All it does is put another burden on people who like to smoke a cigarette.

People may wish to smoke a cigarette to help calm down while they are dealing with an issue. Are they not much better off buying a cigarette to calm them down than buying all the illegal drugs that are available but which the Government is doing nothing about? It is not giving the proper enforcement powers to the Garda to help it catch the people who are selling illegal drugs. Would it not put the revenue raised by the 50 cents increase into Garda services? Would it not put the revenue into measures that would encourage people to give up smoking? The best time to help people to give up smoking is at an early age. A previous speaker said smoking was popular when he was younger. Perhaps it was. As I said, I am a reformed smoker. I made the choice to give them up but the price of them did not make a difference in that regard.

The Tánaiste is a doctor. He knows the medical implications of smoking. There are many things apart from smoking that have implications for one's health. It is sometimes the case that a comfort cigarette actually calms a person who is in a particular situation. Punishing them by adding 50 cents to a packet of cigarettes is not the way forward, so I am asking the Tánaiste not to go ahead with the increase. Reverse psychology. Encourage people to give up cigarettes and give them 50 cents by not increasing the price. It is about encouragement but this budget has nothing to do with encouragement.

The previous speaker stated that smokers do not interfere with anyone other than themselves but that is not the case. If the Deputy meets representatives of the Irish Heart Foundation, they will tell him that the single most important health initiative that would make a difference in terms of heart health and stroke is people giving up cigarettes. There is a wider benefit. It is not down to an individual. If we can encourage people to give up cigarettes, that has a wider benefit than the individual and the benefits to which he referred. I do not think it is down to an individual. The Deputy referred to people getting cancer and whether that is caused by smoking. It is proven that cigarettes cause lung cancer. Several decades ago, my father died of lung cancer. It is when you watch a person struggling for a breath, when the person has a thimbleful of breath, that it hits home, in a way that no advertisement could, just how impactful lung cancer can be.

If we can encourage even a small number of people to give up cigarettes as a result of the fact that they are more expensive, that would be a public good. I do not think it is down to individuals. This is a public health initiative and that is why it has been followed each year. It has not been solely about revenue raising; it has been about something wider. It is important to also have all of the initiatives in terms of public information campaigns and that kind of thing, but this price increase is for the common good and, for that reason, the Social Democrats will be supporting it.

To follow on from the remarks of Deputy Catherine Murphy, smoking causes 6,000 preventable deaths each year. Members may agree or disagree with that figure. I agree with it. This financial resolution is one the Labour Party will be supporting. It is aimed at young people. People under the age of 24 make up 20% of smokers. Young people are still smoking. I hope it is not an unintended consequence of the budget that money saved on contraception will go towards cigarettes. There are people under 24 who are smoking. They make up 20% of smokers. Making cigarettes prohibitively expensive is a way to disincentivise smoking.

While I was growing up, there were the most vivid, visceral and powerful public health campaigns regarding smoking. All Members have seen those campaigns. In spite of such campaigns, we will not reach the target of only 5% of the population being smokers by 2025. The figure at present is 15% and if the current trends continue we will be nowhere near the target. This financial resolution will have an impact, as will the public health campaigns, but we will still fall far short. It is on the Minister for Health, the Government and all Members of the House to consider what more we can do to reduce this number of preventable deaths. Taxation certainly will not do it alone. If we can stop smoking at source by stopping young people from taking it up, as well as reducing the number of people under 24 who smoke, then we can go some way towards achieving the target.

With this budget increase, a packet of cigarettes will cost €15. It has reached one of those round figures such that people will remember that it now costs €15 for 20 cigarettes. That will stick with people. It is a significant amount of money. The Labour Party will be supporting this financial resolution but more needs to be done because we are way off making the national target of only 5% of the population being smokers by 2025.

I too wish to address the issue raised by Deputy Fitzpatrick, that is, the illegal tobacco products that, unfortunately, are prevalent in so many communities. I have heard of people going door to door in housing estates, selling these illicit products. Members can imagine the damage that is doing to human beings. In the Border area, there was enough damage done to vehicles and legitimate businesses as a result of the washing of diesel and the stretching of petrol by those gangs and criminals who inflicted so much damage on communities. I heard that there have recently been large seizures of raw tobacco. If that is the case, it indicates there is a factory or factories manufacturing these illegal cigarettes. I would like to get an assurance from the Tánaiste that the Revenue Commissioners will have the resources to tackle such scourges. I refer to the damage being done to people's health by this illicit product and those making monetary gains without thought for the health of innocent people.

Like one of the previous speakers, I, too, wonder whether we have reached a tipping point in the context of the price of cigarettes. Yesterday, I was in a queue in a shop behind a lady who I could tell was suffering social disadvantage. I saw her trying to buy a couple of small sweets for her child. She then paid out €14.50 for a box of cigarettes. What struck me was that I knew she did not really have the money to buy cigarettes and I knew it was putting incredible strain on the family. How are we helping her by putting an extra €2.50 cost on her this week with the increase in excise duty? As mentioned a few minutes ago, perhaps the Government should have stated it would ring-fence the extra revenue accruing and give it to the Garda or a drugs task force or do something with it that people could understand. At this stage, after carbon levies and everything else, this increase is probably a step too far.

I thank Deputies for their remarks and their contribution to the debate. It is important that we have a debate on this matter. Nobody should be pilloried for their views on this issue. It was interesting to hear the various arguments from different Deputies. The proposed amendments to Financial Resolution No. 1 would reduce the proposed increase in excise duty for tobacco which will apply from midnight tonight. The increase proposed is 50 cents, inclusive of VAT, on a packet of 20 cigarettes for the most popular price category, together with pro rata increases for other tobacco products. As I stated earlier, increasing taxation on tobacco is a public health policy and it is designed to continue the downward trend in smoking rates in Ireland.

In terms of revenue raising, the increase in the excise duty on tobacco products will raise €56 million in a full year. It is worth noting that €16 million is being provided for Healthy Ireland for campaigns to reduce smoking, obesity and all of those things, and there is a further €35 million for new measures in mental health.

It is not directly hypothecated, but the revenue has to come from somewhere, and this is one of the sources from which it comes.

In 2020, receipts from taxes on tobacco raised €1.201 billion, up from €1.131 billion in 2019. The yield for 2021 is forecast at €1.262 billion. Notwithstanding the fact that it is going up every year, the amount of revenue coming in is also still going up every year. We have not yet reached that point of diminishing returns. The increases every year are still resulting in increased revenue every year, even though fewer people are smoking.

Having said that, it is possible that the increased receipts in 2020 and 2021 were as a result of the restrictions on travel and the availability of non-Irish duty-paid alternatives. The receipts suggest that a continuation of a longer term trend of tobacco excise receipts remaining stable at around €1.1 billion per annum is possible, but as travel resumes again and as duty-free is now possible between Ireland and Great Britain, we will have to watch this area quite closely over the course of the next year.

In terms of investment in public health, which Deputy Boyd Barrett rightly raised, an additional €16 million will be provided next year for public health initiatives. We have seen a significant increase in public health staffing in recent years because of the pandemic. All of these staff need to be retained because there is much to do in public health. There is no better investment in health than in public health, because stopping people getting sick in the first place is the best way to save money in the health service. We have neglected that area for too long. I am glad to see that we have agreement with the public health doctors to give them consultant status. That process is very much under way.

I would strongly encourage people who smoke to get help to give up. It is an addiction and it is hard to give it up on your own, but help is available. Help is there from the HSE Quit team and from GPs. Some Deputies mentioned the hit that people can get from tobacco. That is true, but it can be substituted by nicotine replacement therapy, which is a therapy that GPs can prescribe, is available under the general medical services and the medical card system and costs less than cigarettes and can give people that benefit they have become used to without the cancer-causing chemicals going into their chests and lungs. I would encourage anyone who has not yet tried to quit with help to seek help this time. It is very hard to give up on your own. Perhaps only 20% of people can give up on their own. If you go to your GP or contact the HSE Quit line, they can give you the support that you need. You are three or four times more likely to give up with that extra bit of help. That is now funded under the medical card system.

Amendment put:
The Dáil divided: Tá, 47; Níl, 87; Staon, 0.

  • Andrews, Chris.
  • Barry, Mick.
  • Boyd Barrett, Richard.
  • Brady, John.
  • Browne, Martin.
  • Buckley, Pat.
  • Carthy, Matt.
  • Clarke, Sorca.
  • Collins, Joan.
  • Collins, Michael.
  • Connolly, Catherine.
  • Conway-Walsh, Rose.
  • Cronin, Réada.
  • Crowe, Seán.
  • Cullinane, David.
  • Daly, Pa.
  • Donnelly, Paul.
  • Ellis, Dessie.
  • Fitzmaurice, Michael.
  • Funchion, Kathleen.
  • Gould, Thomas.
  • Guirke, Johnny.
  • Healy-Rae, Danny.
  • Healy-Rae, Michael.
  • Kenny, Gino.
  • Kenny, Martin.
  • Kerrane, Claire.
  • Mac Lochlainn, Pádraig.
  • McDonald, Mary Lou.
  • Mitchell, Denise.
  • Munster, Imelda.
  • Murphy, Paul.
  • Mythen, Johnny.
  • Nolan, Carol.
  • O'Donoghue, Richard.
  • O'Reilly, Louise.
  • O'Rourke, Darren.
  • Ó Broin, Eoin.
  • Ó Laoghaire, Donnchadh.
  • Ó Murchú, Ruairí.
  • Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.
  • Pringle, Thomas.
  • Quinlivan, Maurice.
  • Ryan, Patricia.
  • Stanley, Brian.
  • Tully, Pauline.
  • Ward, Mark.

Níl

  • Bacik, Ivana.
  • Berry, Cathal.
  • Brophy, Colm.
  • Browne, James.
  • Bruton, Richard.
  • Burke, Colm.
  • Burke, Peter.
  • Butler, Mary.
  • Byrne, Thomas.
  • Cahill, Jackie.
  • Calleary, Dara.
  • Canney, Seán.
  • Carey, Joe.
  • Carroll MacNeill, Jennifer.
  • Chambers, Jack.
  • Collins, Niall.
  • Costello, Patrick.
  • Coveney, Simon.
  • Creed, Michael.
  • Crowe, Cathal.
  • Devlin, Cormac.
  • Dillon, Alan.
  • Duffy, Francis Noel.
  • Durkan, Bernard J.
  • English, Damien.
  • Farrell, Alan.
  • Feighan, Frankie.
  • Fitzpatrick, Peter.
  • Flaherty, Joe.
  • Flanagan, Charles.
  • Foley, Norma.
  • Gannon, Gary.
  • Grealish, Noel.
  • Griffin, Brendan.
  • Harris, Simon.
  • Heydon, Martin.
  • Higgins, Emer.
  • Hourigan, Neasa.
  • Howlin, Brendan.
  • Humphreys, Heather.
  • Kelly, Alan.
  • Lahart, John.
  • Lawless, James.
  • Leddin, Brian.
  • Lowry, Michael.
  • MacSharry, Marc.
  • Madigan, Josepha.
  • Martin, Catherine.
  • McAuliffe, Paul.
  • McGuinness, John.
  • Moynihan, Michael.
  • Murnane O'Connor, Jennifer.
  • Murphy, Catherine.
  • Murphy, Verona.
  • Naughten, Denis.
  • Naughton, Hildegarde.
  • Noonan, Malcolm.
  • O'Brien, Darragh.
  • O'Brien, Joe.
  • O'Callaghan, Cian.
  • O'Callaghan, Jim.
  • O'Connor, James.
  • O'Dea, Willie.
  • O'Donnell, Kieran.
  • O'Donovan, Patrick.
  • O'Dowd, Fergus.
  • O'Gorman, Roderic.
  • O'Sullivan, Christopher.
  • O'Sullivan, Pádraig.
  • Ó Cathasaigh, Marc.
  • Ó Cuív, Éamon.
  • Phelan, John Paul.
  • Rabbitte, Anne.
  • Richmond, Neale.
  • Ring, Michael.
  • Ryan, Eamon.
  • Shanahan, Matt.
  • Sherlock, Sean.
  • Smith, Brendan.
  • Smith, Duncan.
  • Smyth, Niamh.
  • Smyth, Ossian.
  • Stanton, David.
  • Tóibín, Peadar.
  • Troy, Robert.
  • Varadkar, Leo.
  • Whitmore, Jennifer.

Staon

Tellers: Tá, Deputies Pádraig Mac Lochlainn and Denise Mitchell; Níl, Deputies Jack Chambers and Brendan Griffin.
Amendment declared lost.
Deputy Holly Cairns did not vote in this division due to an agreed pairing arrangement with Minister Helen McEntee for the duration of the Minister’s maternity leave.

As the time allowed for the debate has expired I must put the following question in accordance with an order of the Dáil of this day: "That amendments Nos. 2 to 6, inclusive, set down to the motion on Financial Resolution No. 1 are hereby negatived and the motion for Financial Resolution No. 1 is hereby agreed to."

Question put:
The Dáil divided: Tá, 87; Níl, 47; Staon, 0.

  • Bacik, Ivana.
  • Berry, Cathal.
  • Brophy, Colm.
  • Browne, James.
  • Bruton, Richard.
  • Burke, Colm.
  • Burke, Peter.
  • Butler, Mary.
  • Byrne, Thomas.
  • Cahill, Jackie.
  • Canney, Seán.
  • Carey, Joe.
  • Carroll MacNeill, Jennifer.
  • Chambers, Jack.
  • Collins, Niall.
  • Costello, Patrick.
  • Coveney, Simon.
  • Cowen, Barry.
  • Creed, Michael.
  • Crowe, Cathal.
  • Devlin, Cormac.
  • Dillon, Alan.
  • Duffy, Francis Noel.
  • Durkan, Bernard J.
  • English, Damien.
  • Farrell, Alan.
  • Feighan, Frankie.
  • Fitzpatrick, Peter.
  • Flaherty, Joe.
  • Flanagan, Charles.
  • Foley, Norma.
  • Grealish, Noel.
  • Griffin, Brendan.
  • Harris, Simon.
  • Heydon, Martin.
  • Higgins, Emer.
  • Hourigan, Neasa.
  • Howlin, Brendan.
  • Humphreys, Heather.
  • Kelly, Alan.
  • Lahart, John.
  • Lawless, James.
  • Leddin, Brian.
  • Lowry, Michael.
  • MacSharry, Marc.
  • Madigan, Josepha.
  • Martin, Catherine.
  • McAuliffe, Paul.
  • McConalogue, Charlie.
  • McGuinness, John.
  • McHugh, Joe.
  • Moynihan, Aindrias.
  • Moynihan, Michael.
  • Murnane O'Connor, Jennifer.
  • Murphy, Verona.
  • Naughten, Denis.
  • Naughton, Hildegarde.
  • Noonan, Malcolm.
  • O'Brien, Darragh.
  • O'Brien, Joe.
  • O'Callaghan, Cian.
  • O'Callaghan, Jim.
  • O'Connor, James.
  • O'Dea, Willie.
  • O'Donnell, Kieran.
  • O'Donovan, Patrick.
  • O'Dowd, Fergus.
  • O'Gorman, Roderic.
  • O'Sullivan, Christopher.
  • O'Sullivan, Pádraig.
  • Ó Cathasaigh, Marc.
  • Ó Cuív, Éamon.
  • Phelan, John Paul.
  • Rabbitte, Anne.
  • Richmond, Neale.
  • Ring, Michael.
  • Ryan, Eamon.
  • Sherlock, Sean.
  • Smith, Brendan.
  • Smith, Duncan.
  • Smyth, Niamh.
  • Smyth, Ossian.
  • Stanton, David.
  • Tóibín, Peadar.
  • Troy, Robert.
  • Varadkar, Leo.
  • Whitmore, Jennifer.

Níl

  • Andrews, Chris.
  • Barry, Mick.
  • Boyd Barrett, Richard.
  • Brady, John.
  • Browne, Martin.
  • Buckley, Pat.
  • Carthy, Matt.
  • Clarke, Sorca.
  • Collins, Joan.
  • Collins, Michael.
  • Connolly, Catherine.
  • Conway-Walsh, Rose.
  • Cronin, Réada.
  • Crowe, Seán.
  • Cullinane, David.
  • Daly, Pa.
  • Donnelly, Paul.
  • Ellis, Dessie.
  • Fitzmaurice, Michael.
  • Funchion, Kathleen.
  • Gould, Thomas.
  • Guirke, Johnny.
  • Healy-Rae, Danny.
  • Healy-Rae, Michael.
  • Kenny, Gino.
  • Kerrane, Claire.
  • Mac Lochlainn, Pádraig.
  • McDonald, Mary Lou.
  • Mitchell, Denise.
  • Munster, Imelda.
  • Murphy, Paul.
  • Mythen, Johnny.
  • Nolan, Carol.
  • O'Donoghue, Richard.
  • O'Reilly, Louise.
  • O'Rourke, Darren.
  • Ó Broin, Eoin.
  • Ó Laoghaire, Donnchadh.
  • Ó Murchú, Ruairí.
  • Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.
  • Pringle, Thomas.
  • Quinlivan, Maurice.
  • Ryan, Patricia.
  • Shanahan, Matt.
  • Stanley, Brian.
  • Tully, Pauline.
  • Ward, Mark.

Staon

Tellers: Tá, Deputies Jack Chambers and Brendan Griffin; Níl, Deputies Pádraig Mac Lochlainn and Denise Mitchell.
Question declared carried.
Deputy Holly Cairns did not vote in this division due to an agreed pairing arrangement with Minister Helen McEntee for the duration of the Minister’s maternity leave.