Micheál Martin
Ceist:1. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the number of Cabinet sub-committee meetings he has attended recently. [3273/15]
Ceisteanna - Questions (Resumed)
Cabinet Committee Meetings
Micheál Martin
Ceist:2. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the number of Cabinet sub-committees held in April 2015. [18118/15]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together. I chaired three Cabinet committee meetings in April, five in May and one to date in June. Also, the Economic Management Council met six times in April, once in May and once to date in June.
I thank the Taoiseach. I refer to the Economic Management Council, which met six times.
It met six times in April, once in May and once in June, a total of eight times.
What about the health committee?
The questions concern the number of Cabinet sub-committee meetings.
Given the two issues that have emerged, I am interested, in particular, in the number of times the sub-committees have met. It seems to me that the issue of child poverty has reached alarming levels. The number of children in consistent poverty has almost doubled in two years under the Government's watch, from about 6% to 12%. It is a shocking statistic which has been commented on by the United Nations and various NGOs with responsibility for children.
It has been exacerbated by cuts of one third to the back to school allowance, from €150 to €100 for primary school children and €250 to €200 for secondary school children. Up to 138,000 children live in poverty but I do not detect any strategic response to this issue in any shape or form. The latest manoeuvre, or decision, is to take 30,000 people out of the one-parent family payment, which we discussed earlier. When it is all added up, it is blow after blow. Take housing, for example, up to 1,000 children are living in hotel rooms in Dublin alone. I was canvassing last week within a mile of this House and noted some of the conditions in which children had to play were quite appalling and absolutely unacceptable. There seems to be no response whatsoever to this real serious crisis in society.
The Economic Management Council has been extremely weak and is not meeting often enough to deal with the social dimension of the Government’s economic and financial policies, policies which the Economic and Social Research Institute, ESRI, has stated successively and consistently target low-income families and lone-parent families and, in particular, exacerbate the number of children now in consistent property. Will the Economic Management Council, as well as the other relevant Cabinet committees, such as the child care and health committees, meet more often in June and July to develop meaningful and urgent emergency responses to the various factors that give rise to, and increase, such consistent child poverty? These responses should cover the very basics of access to child care and basic incomes. They should allow children to get back to school without undue cost and for parents to get a roof over their heads without the necessity of sofa-surfing, which many of them have to do, as well as asking relatives to look after their children while they try to get rental accommodation which they cannot afford because the rent cap has been introduced and limits them. The rent allowance is not sustainable. When one adds up all the policies, it is a very sorry story in terms of the Government’s lack of coherence in its response to dealing with children in consistent poverty.
I also want the Economic Management Council to meet more often in June and July to deal with the crisis in research policy. Back in March, an extraordinary letter was published in The Irish Times, signed by many eminent and highly qualified researchers such as Tom Cotter and Luke Drury, which stated:
The policy of sustained investment in scientific excellence that helped build a vibrant scientific community in Ireland over the past 15 years has given way to a short-sighted drive for commercialisable research in a very limited set of prescribed areas.
It is a damning indictment of the Government’s policy on research with its undermining of basic research and its lack of comprehension on the need for a proper balance between basic research and applied research, which will ultimately lead to a proper research environment. As a result of this, our universities are going down the world rankings because of the crisis in the research community. Recently, the general secretary of IFUT, the Irish Federation of University Teachers, Mike Jennings, spoke about the transient, roll-over and short-term nature of research and the crisis in the provision of a proper and secure employment framework for researchers in Irish universities.
I am not sure if the Taoiseach is familiar with the Tyndall National Institute. The Economic Management Council, however, would be aware that this institute is being marketed and described as the premier research facility in the country. There has been an ongoing industrial relations problem there, however, simply because these world-class researchers are not getting the same entitlements as those who work in University College Cork up the road. It is quite shocking. As a former enterprise Minister, I was involved in supporting this institute. IDA Ireland brings many multinational companies there to showcase the quality of Irish research. On her visit to Cork, the Queen’s first port of call was the Tyndall National Institute. The problem is that it has been fighting for years to achieve recognition for its status.
National University of Ireland Galway recently astonished the Labour Court by stating its policy was that not one single researcher in its employment was entitled to the same job security afforded to all public servants in return for accepting significant cuts in salary. Maynooth University tried to convince the authorities that the researchers it employed were not employees but guests. The Labour Court did not take that on board. University College Cork has begun using the term hosting to describe its relationship with people who enhance the international profile of the college by engaging in appropriate research.
We are straying a bit here.
Research is fundamental to economic policy. I have spoken about it with many people recently. I was involved in it myself when implementing the Science Foundation Ireland strategy from 2006 to 2011. It is the cornerstone of the country’s future in economic potential, competitiveness and capacity to innovate but is going down the tubes under the Taoiseach’s Government because there is no coherent strategy. Will he confirm that the Economic Management Council will meet far more often and have this issue on its agenda, along with the consistent child poverty issue?
The Deputy raised several issues. Dealing with Cabinet sub-committees in the normal structure of the Dáil week on a Tuesday and Wednesday, I found it became impossible to get anything done because of this kind of business, questions, other debates and all of that taking up time. Accordingly, I devote one Monday in the month to Cabinet sub-committee meetings from eight in the morning right through. If necessary, I will try to fit in one that has to be recalled for other reasons during the course of a normal working week, which is not that easy to do. This structure has worked well in that priorities and problems can be identified and one can request and demand that Ministers and Departments respond within specific time limits to these matters.
One cannot tackle the problem of low-income families and child poverty as effectively as one would like until one has an economy that is functioning strongly and will provide one with the resources to do that. That is why the Government’s mandate was to fix the public finances and put the country back to work. That is why I am pleased that 104,000 new jobs have been created since the action plan was published in 2012 and we expect 40,000 to be created this year and again for the following two years. By 2018, whatever party is in office, we will practically have full employment and anyone who wants a job will get one.
Generally, the best opportunity to deal with low-income problems is a job. That is why one of the first decisions the Government made in dealing with the troika was to restore the minimum wage. I was explaining to the Greek Prime Minister last night that when the troika demanded of and dictated to Deputy Martin’s Government that this is what it has to do-----
No, that is not what happened.
In many cases those recommendations were not acceptable to this Government. If they were not, the Government was required to cost alternatives which would achieve the same growth objective. That is why one of the first decisions was to reverse the cut in the minimum wage that had been brought in by the previous Government. Despite economic constraints, there are now 420,000 people who do not have any liability for the universal social charge. That will increase to 500,000 people in the October budget, taking a further 80,000 people out of that bracket.
The focus of the Government in terms of income has been on earners of €75,000 down to €30,000 who have had to pay for everything. The real priority is in there, hard-pressed working families in many cases. While the situation has improved, I am the first to say it is not yet the way we want it to be and we still have quite a distance to go.
The Deputy spoke earlier about some of the issues in respect of lone parents. I did not have time to say the single parent child carer tax credit is €1,650 per annum and this has the effect of reducing the claimant's tax liability by €31.73 a week, which is an important consideration for a person in that position. In addition, that claimant may also be entitled to an extension in the rate band of €4,000, which would increase the rate band for 2015 from €33,800 to €37,800 which is an important element. Where income exceeds €37,800, that additional rate band is worth a maximum of €840 or €16.15 per week. These are deliberate changes to impact beneficially on lower-paid people. The maximum value of the credit in the additional rate band is €2,490 or €47.88 a week, and this credit is payable to any single person with a child under 18 years of age or over 18 years of age if in full-time education. As well as this, as the Tánaiste has already pointed out, there is the jobseeker's allowance transitional arrangement which is important. The back to work family dividend is designed to further improve the incentive of taking up employment for people with children. It will allow lone parents transitioning from the jobseeker's allowance to retain their increase for a qualified child if they move off welfare and into employment. There is the re-rating of the family income supplement and enhanced access to the Intreo service, which is now a very different animal than it used to be as people are spoken to and interviewed in respect of their ambitions, motivation, experience and willingness to work. We also have JobsPlus and the changes that have been made in child care, and further work is going on.
Child poverty is an issue for everybody. It is important that something be done about it. This is why these changes in the welfare area are all positive. The difference in what the Government did in meeting the targets to allow us to move out of the bailout programme was to remain competitive, not increase income tax and have pro-growth proposals which have now led to a point where this country is recognised internationally, as the Deputy knows, as being exceptionally attractive for investment.
The Deputy raised a number of important points about the Tyndall National Institute and other areas around the country. We have the major success of the web summit every year and all of the people who work on it. Up to 25,000 people will participate this year. This has all to do with research and innovation to an extraordinary degree. At the other end of the scale-----
It has nothing to do with what I asked the Taoiseach.
-----5,000 young children presented their particular proposals at a gaming and science fair recently which was quite exceptional. I was at a firm in Sandyford recently and it was interesting to see two ends of the research and innovation spectrum. Some of the brightest students from universities all over the world were at the plant concerned speaking to and being mentored by Irish peers in terms of the research and the innovative work they do. At the lower end of the scale, they had teams of children aged six or seven who are now well ensconced in CoderDojo which is an important voluntary movement. These children mentor their own age group on the writing of code which makes computers work and think.
I do not know the industrial relations problem that exists-----
I was talking about the research environment generally.
We are talking about the Cabinet sub-committee meeting.
I addressed a conference in the Bord Gáis Energy Theatre the other day, mostly driven by extraordinary women involved in the STEM area of mathematics, research and technology, pointing out the opportunities that exist here-----
That was all developed before the Taoiseach's time. I am talking about what is happening now.
This is all happening now and this is all for the future, as the Deputy is well aware. The Deputy has to make his case, but let me assure him this is one of the real focuses and priorities of the Government. As pointed out by Mr. Ferguson of Science Foundation Ireland, we do not have the money to invest in everything but we do have money to invest in research, innovation and development, and there is a great deal of it going on. Perhaps I can take details from the Deputy later of the problem in so far as industrial relations are concerned. I know Her Majesty went down to the Tyndall National Institute and I was there myself once or twice. It is a fabulous location, no more than many others around the country in universities.
I remind Deputies that the next group of questions will deal with the World Economic Forum held in Davos in January. I want to get through this agenda quickly.
Déanfaidh mé mo dhícheall. When we ask questions about how often these committees meet and how many of them the Taoiseach attends it is obviously an attempt to try to figure it out, hold the Government to account and ensure there is sufficient delivery for citizens. This is difficult given that there is a prohibition on the Taoiseach giving the detail of these meetings, although I must say in fairness he has said he will try to inform us as much as he can about it.
That has been the case since Adam was a boy.
If I try to come to a sense of the efficiency of these committees, it has to be based on the results. I will present very briefly three issues I have raised consistently. I have called for a root and branch fully independent inquiry into all care facilities for citizens with intellectual disabilities. We have had three reports, one on Áras Attracta and HIQA reports on Redwood and, most recently, St. Mary's in Drumcar. These are the most vulnerable people in the care of the State. With regard to the questions I raised earlier, the Taoiseach acknowledged without a blink that the Government had not implemented all the recommendations of a report which reviewed the deaths of 196 children in the care of the State. He said the Government's intention is to do so. He has not done it and he has only whatever time he has left in this term. An issue which has almost become normal is citizens on trolleys, including most recently two citizens who were alive during 1916. Today, there are 397 patients on trolleys, 41 of whom are in my constituency in Our Lady of Lourdes-----
The Deputy is really straying, I am sorry.
With respect-----
With respect-----
-----I have only started to talk-----
The Deputy does not even have a question down in this group so I am letting him in with a supplementary.
I will come to the conclusion. Here are three critical issues. There is the business of patients on trolleys. We are in the height of summer with glorious weather and these are figures we normally have at the height of winter. There is a crisis. The Taoiseach talks about a recovery. Do not talk about a fair recovery. It is not a fair recovery if the Government does not implement recommendations and just dismisses a request for an inquiry into the way we treat citizens with intellectual disabilities or if we just ignore the fact that in June 2015, after four years of Government, almost 400 patients are on trolleys and other patients in hospital beds cannot be released because although they have been medically discharged, it is not safe to bring them home because of the cuts made by the Government to protections and the necessities of life. Is this is not how we should judge, not by how many meetings and how many the Taoiseach attends, and this is all important, but by results? On these three issues the Taoiseach batted away a serious question today and has not even responded to the request for an investigation into care centres for citizens with intellectual disabilities.
There is ongoing dreadfulness in hospital corridors with people on trolleys, if they are lucky enough to get trolleys. Is that not a way to judge the efficacy of these committees?
The Deputy will recall that I read out for him the fact that 25 recommendations were made by the report and all of these were not implemented. The Deputy would certainly have a valid reason to say something very different if I said they had been implemented. I pointed out to the Deputy the recommendations where work was under way and it is the intention to implement all of those. Of course, every issue that the Deputy or any other Deputy raises is perfectly valid. With regard to the question of trolleys, he has had this discussion before with the Minister for Health on many occasions.
The Government promised to end it. It had big billboards pronouncing that.
I know. In Ireland in 2015, under any circumstances, it is just not acceptable that a person of those senior years should be left on a trolley in the first place. That should not happen. I do not manage the corridors in hospitals but anybody with a management responsibility could understand a situation where-----
Name the manager.
-----one would not have to have such a situation applying. The Minister was very concerned about that, as I was myself. In any circumstances, that should not be, as Deputy Martin knows well.
The Taoiseach was meant to take charge of it.
The question is how to deal with all these issues. The transition and the work under way in the Department of Health will certainly not be easy to conclude successfully. Every person I meet who has been through the health system and had treatment has nothing but the highest regard for those who work on the front line, including nurses, doctors etc. The problem in our system is getting in to get that treatment. Trolley numbers are not as high as they used to be but they are still too high. Clearly, the issue has been addressed, in part, by the Government in making further funding available in the transition to the setting up of the hospital groups. That is complex because in some areas they are all HSE hospitals and in others, there are private or voluntary hospitals involved. Careful scrutiny is required so that there can be responsibility allocated to each group. This will eventually transition to a trust to make decisions about what services can be best supplied in an area.
A senior consultant said to me only last week that we could look at it in the following way. He said that in his hospital, the question is what it does as well or better than anybody else, as if a hospital cannot measure up in the standards of what it does, the hospital fails itself, the patient and the system. Many accident and emergency departments are under pressure but all have escalation plans in place to manage the movement of patients through the system in a safe, controlled and planned way. That supports and ensures the delivery of patient care.
The task force convened in December last year had the purpose of providing focus and momentum in dealing with the challenges of overcrowded accident and emergency departments. The Deputy knows from the experience of Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital the problems that can cause pressure because of the footprint, the numbers of people coming through and the stress that staff experience. The HSE published the task force action plan in April with a range of time-defined actions to optimise the existing hospital and community capacity, develop internal capability to deal with the issues as they arise and improve leadership, governance, planning and oversight.
On top of that and based on that report, there was an extra allocation of €74 million provided in 2015 to increase the number of long-term nursing home care places and reduce the waiting time for the funding in such places, as well as providing additional care, beds and home care packages that would provide viable supports for those who no longer need acute hospital care. I saw reports on that recently and if people are asked their preference, they will of course say they prefer to be at home for as long as possible. The additional funding came on top of some budgetary measures, when the Government provided an extra €25 million to support alternatives to and relieve pressure on acute hospitals.
The number of delayed discharges is reducing steadily to a current figure of 650, or a reduction of over 20% since November last year. The waiting time for funding under the nursing home support scheme has reduced from 11 weeks at the beginning of the year to four weeks at the moment, which is a significant improvement. The numbers waiting for the support scheme funding have reduced to 535 and are stable; the funding is set to support an additional 1,604 people this year. I understand that 1,513 transitional care places were provided in the first four months of this year and that will benefit patients who require a transfer from the acute hospital system. There are 140 from a total of 173 additional short-stay, non-acute beds available in public units across the country, and the remaining numbers will be provided over the next number of weeks. The Deputy knows that Mount Carmel opened on target in April and that will provide a further 65 beds by the end of this month, with 45 currently in place, which is welcome. An additional 400 home care packages have been provided to specific hospitals in the greater Dublin area since January this year, with a further 860 additional home care packages to be provided from June to the end of the year.
I spoke to relations of a good lady who was approved for a home care package quite recently and it is extraordinary to hear of the change in her comfort and convenience arising from a good home care package. It can complement their private resources and make for a very comfortable position for the person in question. We need to see more of that rather than having people transition at a very early stage into a long-stay institution, where they may not wish to be in the first instance, until they might have to go because of physical or medical conditions.
Diplomatic Representation
Micheál Martin
Ceist:3. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he was asked to attend the World Economic Forum in Davos in Switzerland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3274/15]
Gerry Adams
Ceist:4. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his visit to Davos in Switzerland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4299/15]
Micheál Martin
Ceist:5. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he met the President of Ukraine, Mr. Petro Poroshenko, while attending the World Economic Forum in Davos in Switzerland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4302/15]
Joe Higgins
Ceist:6. Deputy Joe Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he will report on meetings he held with business leaders at the World Economic Forum in Davos in Switzerland in January 2015. [5468/15]
Joe Higgins
Ceist:7. Deputy Joe Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he will report on meetings he held with political leaders at the World Economic Forum in Davos in Switzerland in January 2015. [5469/15]
Gerry Adams
Ceist:8. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meetings with political leaders at the World Economic Forum in Davos in Switzerland in January 2015; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15225/15]
Gerry Adams
Ceist:9. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his attendance at the World Economic Forum in Davos in Switzerland in January 2015; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15226/15]
Richard Boyd Barrett
Ceist:10. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Taoiseach if he was invited to the World Economic Forum in Davos in Switzerland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20233/15]
I propose to answer Questions Nos. 3 to 10, inclusive, together.
I was invited by Professor Klaus Schwab to attend the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum and I travelled to Davos for 21 January to 23 January. The annual meeting is attended by political and business leaders and heads of international organisations from across the globe. The theme of this year’s meeting was "The new global context". On Wednesday evening, 21 January, I attended a function hosted by Professor Schwab, executive chairman of the forum, and this was also attended by other heads of government and the business council of the World Economic Forum. On the Thursday morning I participated in a high level plenary session to discuss economic growth and political stability in Europe. The other panellists in the discussion were Sigmar Gabriel, Vice Chancellor and Federal Minister of Economic Affairs and Energy of Germany; Prime Minister Mark Rutte of the Netherlands; Prime Minister Laimdota Straujuma of Latvia and the then Prime Minister of Finland, Alexander Stubb.
For the past four years, I have hosted an IDA Ireland dinner as part of Ireland's participation in the World Economic Forum. Each year, IDA Ireland has secured representation at the very highest levels from both existing and prospective foreign direct investment clients from some of the world’s largest multinational corporations and future technology leaders for this dinner event. There were 23 companies represented this year and these companies employ approximately 24,000 people in Ireland.
I outlined Ireland's path towards economic recovery and how we are steadily moving up the global competitiveness rankings. I emphasised that Ireland today is a key location of choice for manufacturing, services, research and development and strategic investments, noting also our young well educated and flexible workforce. I acknowledged the vital contribution that many of the companies represented had made to Ireland and to our economy and urged those who were looking at potential locations for investment or expansion to consider Ireland. IDA Ireland is actively following up on discussions regarding potential employment and investment projects with a number of these companies. I firmly support the IDA Ireland view that attendance at this event greatly enhances awareness of Ireland as a potential foreign direct investment location. In addition, I undertook media engagements alongside IDA Ireland, and held bilateral meetings with eight existing and prospective foreign direct investment companies, which employ approximately 700,000 globally and over 7,000 people in Ireland.
While in Davos, I had a bilateral meeting with Prime Minister John Key of New Zealand. I congratulated the Prime Minister on his return to office following the September elections in New Zealand. We discussed the excellent bilateral relations between Ireland and New Zealand and ways of expanding trade and investment between our two countries, noting that we both have small, open and vibrant economies. We also noted that our two countries are unique in the world in our agricultural practices and could benefit from information-sharing and expanded trade in this area. We discussed the challenges of hosting the Rugby World Cup and Ireland's bid to host part of the 2023 event.
I did not meet with the President of Ukraine in Davos.
The World Economic Forum provides an exceptional opportunity to interact with key players in the business world and I availed of every opportunity to promote Ireland as a key location for international business and investment. Participation in the World Economic Forum has helped achieve positive outcomes in terms of investment into Ireland in the past and will continue to do so.
I thank the Taoiseach for his reply. At the start we should note that most of these questions were tabled over five months ago. The delay is not just because of the nature of Taoiseach's Question Time. The Taoiseach halved the number of Taoiseach's questions periods when he came into government four years ago, taking out one day of Taoiseach's questions. He also does not reschedule when he cancels on a Tuesday. That has allowed a significant backlog to build up. I have asked him to address this, but nothing has been done over the past four years.
The Taoiseach spoke about the plenary session on economic growth that he attended and his main message at Davos was that Ireland was open for business and that he was not going to drift into populism. He said that at the time because it was before the general election in Greece. That promise did not last too long. I have noticed in his remarks that he creates a political narrative that suits his own party's situation. It is not today or yesterday that Ireland became a focal point for inward investment, particularly for high-end manufacturing. It is a policy that has been successfully implemented over a 30-year period, if not longer, in terms of both our place in Europe and our low corporation tax, which have been essential ingredients in attracting inward investment. He must accept that when he is talking to multinational companies, as he did in Davos, which employ 24,000 people, as he said, although of course many more thousands are employed than that, key reasons they are here are long-term investment in people, in our education system and research, and the long-term basis of key public policies, such as our pro-European Union position and our low corporation tax. The Taoiseach tends to place the emphasis on a shortened period and he does not talk up the consistency of long-term policy in Ireland, which is the cornerstone. That is what gives certainty to those who invest and have invested over a long period of time, particularly in the life sciences and technology - the Intels and Pfizers of this world. Does the Taoiseach share the view of multinational investors that long-term investment in people and ideas is central to why they are here?
That leads me to a further question. If the Taoiseach believes in that, and he knows that was a key theme at Davos, as it has been for many years, how can the disproportionate cuts to third and fourth level education help Ireland's reputation in attracting foreign direct investment? How can we face the chief executives with a straight face and talk up our investment in education and research while in reality there have been significant cuts to investment in third and fourth level education and research? Only a few months ago, an unprecedented letter from some of our most senior researchers across the country was published, which complained about the lack of funding for basic research in science. They said:
As scientists in Ireland and Irish scientists abroad, we are committed to making our contribution to Ireland’s recovery by doing the best and most innovative research possible. However, we are deeply concerned about the research policies implemented by the current Government. The policy of sustained investment in scientific excellence that helped build a vibrant scientific community in Ireland over the past 15 years has given way to a short-sighted drive for commercialisable research in a very limited set of prescribed areas.
I discussed that earlier in terms of the Cabinet committee. I do so now in terms of the key message of Davos. They also said:
Along with an investment in research that is below the EU average, steadily decreasing core grants to universities, and a constant demand to increase student numbers, these policies are creating a perfect storm for scientific research and education in Ireland and are undermining our abilities to carry out world-class research, to retain scientific talent in the country and also to educate future scientists and build a real and sustainable knowledge economy.
What they are saying flies in the face of the official pronouncements, the rhetoric and the political narrative and it is extremely worrying. Well over 100 scientists, both in Ireland and abroad, have put their names to this plea to sort out what is going on in third and fourth level and to change our policy, which is overly reliant on the applied side, ignoring the fundamental importance of basic research both to a proper third level system and to a proper research environment.
In addition, I was not just talking earlier about industrial relations in Ireland, but the absence of career pathways in Ireland for researchers. Researchers in Ireland are now expected to spend ten years without any contract or any security whatsoever. It is not sustainable in terms of building a world-class research environment. Many researchers will leave the country if something is not done about it. Many of the presentations at Davos, and the Taoiseach's own comments there, will mean very little if they are not backed up by a sustained, coherent science and research policy, which the Taoiseach currently does not have. That is the reason for the extraordinary situation I outlined earlier as described in an article written by Mike Jennings, who is the general secretary of the Irish Federation of University Teachers. I acknowledge he has an interest in representing his members, but he is saying that "[t]he vast majority of the estimated 5,000 full-time researchers attached to Irish higher-education institutions work on externally funded and temporary, insecure contracts" and the emphasis of the universities is on keeping them at one remove, short term and contractual. That is what is happening. If one talks to any researcher, they cannot get mortgages.
The Government says we want to become the beacon of research and to attract the best and the brightest to research. It says we want people to do PhDs, but it cut the funding for PhDs. I do not know why it did that. It cut the postgraduate research grants. It is an extraordinary, counterintuitive measure, which hardly mattered in terms of its impact on the public finances, yet the former Minister, Deputy Ruairí Quinn, went ahead and did it, aided and abetted by the Taoiseach. It all flies in the face of what the Taoiseach is saying on his plenary panels and at the plenary meetings. There is a contrast between rhetoric and reality. Language becomes meaningless when he reads out the prepared scripts to the great and the good at Davos, but back on the ranch, on the university campuses and in the Tyndalls of this world, the world-class researchers see they are being discriminated against in contrast to employees in secure positions in universities.
The Government is not serious about research and researchers. If one looks at all of the areas, from the Tyndall to NUI Galway and Maynooth University, right across the board the approach is that researchers are not a permanent part of the landscape. In fact, they are a temporary, insecure and revolving-door type operation, and the turnover is key.
This all flies in the face of European policy, the European research area, ERA, approach, the innovation Union and the Horizon 2020 programme that the former Commissioner, Ms Máire Geoghegan-Quinn, outlined last year, all of which emphasised attracting and retaining competent researchers. Giving them security was essential to a long-term impactful research policy. It needs an urgent response from Government because the reality on the ground is a far cry from the kind of high-flowing rhetoric that one articulates and hears at meetings such as Davos. I respectfully put it to the Taoiseach that the Government is living a lie on this one and there is no connection between the rhetoric and the reality on the ground.
I do not know whether the Taoiseach read the Oxfam report published before last year's Davos conference. It warned against global inequality and pointed out that the richest 1% would own more than the rest of the world's population by next year. At last year's Davos meeting, Oxfam reported that the 85 richest persons on the planet had the same wealth as the poorest 50% or 3.5 billion people. Inequality and the poverty that grows from it, I would argue, is the greatest threat to human progress and stability.
Looking at our own place, the Taoiseach should learn from what Oxfam has said. His Government has introduced dreadful policies without any consideration for the social consequences. There is no equality proofing. There is no attention paid to concerns being raised from the Opposition benches and perhaps, for all I know, from within the Government's ranks. The Taoiseach states we are in a recovery. Is that evident in public services, workers' rights, decent work for decent wages, terms and conditions and the eradication of poverty? No doubt these issues were debated and discussed at Davos, but one need only look at our own place, at the treatment of workers at Clerys and other workplaces in recent years during this recovery. One need only look at the plight of the Dunnes Stores workers as evidence of the failure of the Government - the Minister of State responsible is beside the Taoiseach - and Labour to introduce laws as it comes to the end of its term to protect workers.
We are enhancing employment. The ILO said it. Deputy Adams is misleading the House.
The Government's failure to introduce even its own flawed universal health insurance policy is evidence of the Government's failure to address social inequality and poverty, especially child poverty, or clamp down on tax abusers. In April, it was revealed that the breakfast cereal giant, Kellogg's, which routes a significant chunk of its global revenues through the State, paid only €7 million in corporation tax on more than €7.1 billion in sales from Europe, the Middle East and Africa. The Ceann Comhairle should think about that in the morning as he pours milk over his cereal. In 2003, this company paid no Irish tax because it stated it made a loss of €101 million on sales of €1.4 billion. There are lots of other examples of multinationals taking advantage of the State's low rates of effective corporation tax.
What did the Taoiseach say? The most infamous memory that most Irish people have of the Taoiseach at Davos some years before this was of him stating that "people went mad borrowing" in a system that spawned greed, went out of control and led to the crash. So the people were at fault, not the corrupt bankers, not the corrupt politicians, not the developers, not the golden circle. Those are who the Taoiseach said were at fault. I see no evidence of that in the people who have had to bear the brunt of the Government's austerity policies.
At this year's conference, the Taoiseach actually advised European leaders to stick with austerity and ignore growing demands for a more thoughtful and fair way to deal with State and European debt, and on the back of the election of Syriza in Greece, he warned of the dangers of a drift to populism. The Greek people, the very nation that led the foundations of democracy, had voted overwhelming for a government - by the way, as the people did with the Taoiseach's Government - that would stand up for the rights of citizens, and the Taoiseach, who has let the people down in terms of the mandate that he was given, described this as populism.
Would Deputy Adams put a few questions?
Is there a sense of the Taoiseach merely playing the game of being a time-server, going to these events, saying whatever one says at such events and then coming back here and continuing to inflict, and while engaging in the rhetoric of positivity, inflicting great negativity upon working people? The people of the State, like the people of Greece, had an unfair debt burden imposed upon them and it would be good, having failed to stand up for the rights of people here, if at least the Taoiseach supported positively the Greek proposals for a resolution to in some way redeem the Government for the way it has treated the people here in the years since he has come into office.
Ironically, one of the big issues at Davos this year was inequality. This discussion at Davos about inequality in the world was proceeded by the aforementioned Oxfam report that showed by next year the richest 1% of people in the world will own more wealth than everybody else in the world put together. There is a discussion about inequality against a background of obscene and gross inequality where a tiny group of people control the vast majority of wealth in the world while billions of people are starving, without homes, suffering extreme financial distress and suffering austerity. Those discussing austerity, along with the Taoiseach and the other leaders, were 100 billionaires who were invited to this event. They included our old friend, Mr. Denis O'Brien, worth €6 billion. Interestingly, according to The Sunday Times rich list, his wealth has doubled since the recession started. We have persons whose wealth is obscene beyond belief gathering together to discuss the evils of inequality in the world when those who are discussing it are the culprits. They are the ones responsible for the inequality because they, between them, have hoovered up more wealth than the vast majority of the world's population has. Does the Taoiseach agree that is quite obscene?
The Taoiseach, as a head of state, gets a free ticket but the tickets for the conference at Davos are $30,000 each.
There, the super rich - the world's richest people - along with heads of state and royalty discuss inequality. Not many of the victims of inequality will be getting in at $30,000 per ticket. The banquets and partying are pretty sumptuous according to reports.
Not really.
Those are the reports that I am reading, not that I would ever get into Davos or want to.
I was there once, but it was not sumptuous.
Does the Taoiseach believe it is appropriate to attend such a conference when it is a symbol of the gross inequality that has developed in the world? If we are in any way serious about the issue of inequality, we should have an aggressive policy of wealth redistribution. Did the Taoiseach come away from the conference with anything like that? Looking beyond the irony of these super rich people discussing inequality, did the Taoiseach conclude that we should perhaps increase taxes on them and their corporations so that we might have real wealth redistribution and make an impact on the gross gap between the rich and the poor? Has the Taoiseach come away from Davos with any intention of doing that?
I have raised the issue of corporate profits and how little corporations pay in taxes. We have seen a further example in the business section of today's The Irish Times. The Taoiseach should read it. It relates to the Covanta incinerator. Besides the fact that the elected representatives of Dublin opposed it, we have discovered-----
Maybe we will stick to the questions on Davos, please.
My point has to do with inequality and wealth. We have discovered that a shelf company has been set up in Luxembourg by the owners of Covanta. It is charging 13.5% interest on a loan-----
Come on, Deputy.
-----to Covanta such that Covanta's tax liability will be reduced to virtually nothing. Okay?
It is not okay, really. We are discussing Davos.
The point is that, after €100 million in public money has been invested in the project, Covanta will not contribute anything-----
That is a separate matter.
-----to the Exchequer. Aggressive tax avoidance, which we appear to be up to our necks in facilitating, is responsible for the gross inequality that was discussed at Davos despite the irony of hob-nobbing with the individuals who are benefitting from that inequality.
In all sincerity, does the Taoiseach recognise that this level of wealth inequality results from tax scams like that one and the obscene concentration of wealth in the hands of a few individuals, the very people who attended Davos? Having heard reports like the one I have just mentioned, has he any intention of radically moving in the direction of redistributing wealth through higher corporate and income taxes on these wealthy people? What does he propose to do about inequality, which is rampant in this country and across the world?
Will the Deputy allow the Taoiseach to reply?
We have had contributions from three formidable characters here, a Cheann Comhairle. First of all, I would say to Deputy Martin, Deputy Adams and the members of the Technical Group that, if they want and as I said before on many occasions, they can put down a priority question each week and I will answer it if it is an issue that they wish to follow through, and we can deal with the rest of the questions afterwards. There is the offer again for them. If they put down a priority question, I will be happy to deal with it in the ordinary way and follow through with ordinary questions afterwards. It is not good enough that we have to talk about these things five months on.
Deputy Martin went on about populism, long-term investment, high rhetoric and all the rest of it. I am very happy to attend the Davos conference. It is an opportunity to meet with people who have a real investment in this country, not brass plates but in real workers. I do not accept that from Deputy Martin, even if he were to provide it, as he called it, in high-flowing rhetoric in any kind of passage that he might either read or present. MasterCard, Facebook, Google, Bank of America, JETRO, Lone Star, AT&T, Novartis and Salesforce do not deal in that kind of stuff. What they deal with are facts, opportunity, attractiveness of location and people who provide a real opportunity to grow our economy by providing jobs. One of those companies, Salesforce, for instance, has gone from 100 employees to over 1,000 in the last number of years. It now has to move space again because of its growing workforce.
Is one expected not to speak to Bloomberg, Reuters, CNN or CNBC about our country and the international view of Ireland now as moving very much in the right direction where the issue of inequality can only be dealt with when one has a growing economy and one can spread the fruits of that throughout, particularly focusing on those who are more disadvantaged or those who are more vulnerable?
The fact of the matter is, as I have said to Deputy Martin before, here we are with a clear focus on research and innovation and on science-based activities, which have grown in strength over the last period. Given the colleges of technology, our universities, business and the school system, it has never been more advantageous or more exciting to be involved in the whole area of STEM and science and research and innovation. I do not accept the assertion from all of the scientists that this has gone back beyond where it was many years ago. It has grown in popularity and in strength.
No. They said that the Government got it wrong.
It has grown in recognition by those companies that come here for that reason. Why is it that the top ten companies in the world born on the Internet are here?
They were here before the Government entered office.
Why is it that all the pharmaceutical companies are here? Why is it that the financial services people want to come in here?
It is because they do not pay any tax.
Why is it that companies in the IT industry, every one of them, are here? It is because they recognise the talent pool of our young people coming through our educational system.
The Taoiseach has not done his research at all.
When I talk to them, they say it is not just the track record, it is not just the technology and it is not just the tax situation but it is the quality of the talent pool emerging from our school system,------
And the Government is putting it at risk.
Sorry, Deputy. Please.
-----from our educational system. That is paying serious dividends.
I would say to Deputy Boyd Barrett, obviously we have got rid of the double Irish concept because of reputational damage. Ireland plays its full part in the OECD analysis of the base erosion and profit sharing. We got rid of that because there are no brass plate companies here where we just have a plate but nobody employed. Apple, for instance, employs 4,000 people in Deputy Martin's city. There are so many others. Real workers go to work every day. They contribute to the research, innovation and the future. They are changing the frontiers up ahead.
In that sense, the Department of Finance, at the direction of the Minister, has now concluded its public consultation about putting in place an intellectual property knowledge box, which will be competitive and which will be fair, but which will play to win. We have made that point on so many occasions. We are very much up front about our tax situation. We will play hard and we will play to win in a fair sense.
Deputy Adams mentioned all these so-called superior people that he met. This is about talking to companies about investing in our country, where they have the opportunity to invest, create jobs and grow our economy and provide people with opportunities so that one can then deal with the more vulnerable sections of our society.
What is Sinn Féin doing in the North?
I might say to Deputy Adams, when I speak to the IDA or anybody else, I do not charge $500 a plate for the privilege of hearing my few words-----
The Taoiseach charges $5,000.
-----about how we might present our country in that sense.
It was $25,000 in Davos to eat from a plate.
Yes, Deputy Boyd Barrett, I am happy to attend at this function, and believe me - from what the Deputy is reading out there, I actually was in a very different place than all these sumptuous locations-----
There were no billionaires.
-----that the Deputy was talking about. This was strictly business, believe you me, from morning until evening. It is a great opportunity over 15-minute periods to meet people who have an interest in investing in Ireland, some of them quite new. In fact, I might say to the Deputy that some of those who attended at the location that I spoke in were AVG Technologies, Hewlett Packard, Marsh & McLellan Companies, the XL Group plc, AIG,-----
I did not know that the Taoiseach-----
Did the Taoiseach have drinks with Denis?
-----Huawei, Novartis, Palantir Technologies and Senn Delaney. Companies that were there before were Credit Suisse, Medtronic, Microsoft, Zurich Insurance, the McGraw-Hill founders, Bayer AG, Facebook, Accenture, Kaspersky Lab and Airbnb.
These are people who have invested their money here, who employ serious numbers of people and who have the opportunity to have a career, a contract and a really good opportunity to contribute to our country and grow it. For that reason, I make no apology for attending there and doing my business on behalf of the country as best I can.
I thank the Taoiseach.
Written Answers follow Adjournment.