Ged Nash
Louth · Labour Party · Ireland
“However, it is a rich country that has a problem understanding that it is now sustainably rich. Those of us in opposition will, of course, say that this country needs to do better, and it can.”
“On the one hand, it is legitimate for an Opposition party to critique the economic model day in, day out. I do it myself all of the time, and we all know that Ireland can do better. However, at the same time, is that kind of critique helping to persuade those whom we need to persuade into a new Ireland? I am not so sure that it is.”
“There will be fiscal and financial implications for this State in that transition. There is an obligation on us, insofar as we can, to properly interrogate and consider those implications and to be upfront about them.”
“No, it did not, but let us not exaggerate its impact on the Irish economy. It is good and it had an impact, but was there a causal relationship? I am not so sure. The jury is out on that. However, is the Good Friday Agreement a good thing and good for our economy? Of course, it is. Did the guns fall silent in the North?”
“We are not good at describing what those accommodations will be or what that relationship with the UK will be, whether economically, socially, politically, culturally or otherwise. It is a relationship that will have to be maintained. It will look very different as we approach a new Ireland.”
“That was a very different prospect when the vast majority, if not all, of East German citizens wanted to become part of a united German polity. As we know, that is not the case on this island. We need to be careful about how we approach that.”
The complete record
Every one of 739 lines we hold for Ged Nash, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 10 of 15.
“The scheme should be given a decent burial, with the money saved used instead to invest in proper affordable housing. Of course, there are those who are waiting to buy homes of their own who are more than likely renting. While we of course welcome the extension of the renter's credit, it is concerning that the rate of the relief will stay the same. This is all the more surprising in a market where rents are only going one way, which is up. The scourge of vacancy and dereliction blights every village, town and city in Ireland. I have long argued before it hit the mainstream that the Revenue Commissioners should be given the job of collecting the derelict sites levy.”
“Such measures are all, it seems, designed to give certainty to developers over at least a five-year horizon out to 2030, but the only certainty we get from the decision to extend help to buy by another five years at least is that it will keep inducing higher house prices. From the Department officials to the people at Mazars, those who were charged with reviewing the scheme a short few years ago said the same thing, namely that it has a deadweight effect on the market and is fuelling house price inflation. It does not take a genius to work out that developers have simply added the total benefit of the tax relief to the price of homes. There is no evidence anywhere to suggest that this economically illiterate scheme has helped to build a single extra house that would not have been built anyway.”
“It is another wrong-headed policy, another gift for developers and another poorly thought-out measure, where there is very little evidence, if any at all, to suggest that additional homes would be brought forward. There is no evidence to suggest that this would work. I look forward to seeing the advice from the Departments of Finance and housing ahead of this decision having been made. As the Department of Finance admits, there is no obligation on developers to pass on the VAT reduction to home buyers. Should the Government ever decide to revert to the 13.5% rate post 2030, we know that developers will have got used to their juicy bonus and are certain to pass on the hike, leading to even higher apartment prices down the line.”
“I can safely say, and the Cathaoirleach Gníomhach, Deputy McGreehan, will know that practically every apartment development in my hometown of Drogheda in recent years started off as a private initiative but has ended its journey in the hands of an approved housing body. We need to be careful about how we proceed in this regard. The exclusion of approved housing bodies from benefiting from the VAT rate cut is a serious role of the dice and may have the effect of disincentivising the building of apartments for social use at scale, leading to potentially fewer apartments in total across the market. This flies in the face of what now appears to be a very broadly defined social policy. The term "social policy" had to be deployed in the Bill to give effect to this cut under the terms of the VAT directive.”
“We knew that this was the situation but they have explained the situation to us in clear terms and the impact this will have in creating a two-tier market and on approved housing bodies in the context of their importance in the provision of certain forms of supply. Grant Thornton stated that the exclusion of approved housing bodies "will have inequitable impact, especially for those housing bodies who have entered into forward-funding agreements at the behest of the Government." As the Government knows, because it has turned its back on direct State construction at scale, a very large number of social housing units are delivered by private developers as turnkey projects when a local authority or approved housing body enters a forward purchasing arrangement with a private developer.”
“Evictions and homelessness continue to rise. The bank balances of big developers continue to do rise, as do the share prices enjoyed by institutional investors. The Government is caught in a housing doom spiral and needs to change course. The new reduced 9% VAT rate on apartment sales will not apply to approved housing bodies that are engaged in forward purchasing arrangements, which will create a price anomaly in the market. We in Labour have been of this view. It has been borne out by comments from Grant Thornton that the Minister would have read in The Irish Times last week. As Labour TDs, we have been contacted by active developers in our constituencies who have been telling us about this.”
“It means that since midnight on budget day, developers have been making an extra 4% on apartment sales, and that is on apartments that were already built, and not adding a single unit to supply. As with the hospitality VAT rate reduction, there are no conditions and nothing stopping developers from simply pocketing the saving. That generous bonus is on top of what is believed to be a 15% to 20% margin that developers already appear to be making on apartments in cities. I have said before and will repeat now that the Government has no problem with welfare as long as it is for big builders and burger barons. In the area of housing, the Government seems wedded to a suite of policies that have proven to be a failure. Its latest sop to developers is also doomed to failure. House prices and rents continue to rise.”
“The decision to reduce the VAT on apartments to 9% without asking anything of developers in return is a sign of a Government and a housing Minister who will literally try anything to shift the dial on housing, and it shows a Government that is, frankly, out of ideas. I said before that so serious is the housing disaster, we in the Labour Party are prepared to consider any imaginative innovation that has a chance of working to boost supply and, indeed, any measures in our tax system that could be responsibly used to promote that. With the stroke of an unsteady pen, however, this Government has decided to forgo an annual €390 million to give big builders a tax cut and ask precisely nothing of them in return and with no social conditions whatsoever attached. There is nothing on affordable homes, and nothing on cost rental.”
“Instead of this bonkers relief, the Minister should do what we in the Labour Party suggested, which is to set up, for example, a specialist body to support the industry to become sustainable and to professionalise it and to assist all businesses that are encountering problems with high energy costs, and maybe consider reforming and modernising what is an anachronistic and Victorian commercial rate system that bears little relationship to the reality of doing business in 2025. We are told that housing is the key priority for Government. If this was the case, the much-trumpeted new housing plan would have been published weeks before a budget that would have introduced some serious-minded innovations to help build the homes people need.”
“There is no case whatsoever for an expensive tax break for a sector that is adding jobs and where there are more openings than closures taking place. The Minister with responsibility for enterprise has to know this. It is time that key data was produced, supported by the Companies Registration Office, CRO, on the reality of life in a sector where there is always churn. Mark my words, this will provide only an artificial lifeline to some businesses that will momentarily see their bottom line improve, while about 40% of the benefit will go to the likes of McDonalds and Supermacs. This is a bad policy - I think the Minister knows this - and it will in my view come back to haunt the Government parties. This is the second most significant private sector employer and, therefore, it is important.”
“What is more, the lobbyists who were arguing for it were not long in showing their ingratitude on budget day. They said it should be brought in straight away, not in July. I said on budget day that the only people who think that this is a good idea appear to be the Tánaiste, the Minister, Deputy Burke, and the people in the Restaurants Association of Ireland. The Minister knows full well that this will not be passed on. It will not improve the pay and terms and conditions of people working in the sector. The Minister will recall the first 9% VAT cut that was introduced in 2011 in a very different environment. It was a procyclical stimulus that created demand and added jobs at a time when 15% of our people were employed.”
“Of course, it does, but it would be an easier point to make if the bizarre and in my view poorly conceived procyclical policy decision, that is, the reduced 9% VAT rate for the hospitality sector, was not made and legislated for in this Bill. The simple fact is that this cut, with a full-year cost of just south of €700 million, comes at the expense of a form of tax indexation for working people. They were the choices put starkly. I note that unlike some other tax measures in this Bill, there is no sunset provision out to 2030 on the 9% VAT rate like some other provisions. Make no mistake; this cut will remain in for the lifetime of this Government, and there will be little change out of a cumulative €3 billion by the time the next election comes. There is simply no case whatsoever in my view for this tax cut.”
“It is my view, and I have argued this time and again, that we should legislate to provide some form of automatic indexation to our personal taxation system on an annual basis and that we should do the same in terms of specific core weekly social welfare rates. I believe this would be the mark of a mature country. It would provide some certainty for working people, businesses and the Exchequer. We could then have an informed debate each year about the meat and drink of sustainable taxation and spending outside of that. That should be where politics goes. The Government may indeed argue that the decision not to index for next year is a countercyclical policy decision, in that it by extension sees the tax base broaden.”
“Department of Finance data suggests this means that workers, for example, on €50,000 will pay half of their expected pay rise in tax, meaning in real terms that they will probably be paying just shy of another €1,000 next year compared to this year. This will, without a shadow of a doubt, lead to another consequence that the Minister may be concerned about given that this particular budget was framed as a pro-enterprise budget, and there are some pro-enterprise initiatives in it. It will lead to markedly increased demands for pay increases as the real value of wages is allowed in so many cases to fall.”
“As the Minister knows, wages are set to grow by an average of almost 4% next year, and with no changes to PAYE rates or thresholds, more people will pay VAT at the higher rate. This runs counter to, for example, the Fine Gael manifesto pledge. Simply put, if we are to get to a point where nobody earning less than €54,000 per year will pay the higher rate of tax, which is the direction of travel we thought the country was going, that is an adjustment now of an average €2,500 per year at an eye-watering €1 billion-plus per annum through the rest of the lifetime of this Government. That looks increasingly unlikely in truth. Therefore, the net effect of all this is that the Exchequer will probably collect €1 billion-plus more income tax next year merely as a result of the modest pay hikes workers expect to experience next year.”
“This pushes the 2% ceiling up to take account of the welcome 65 cent increase to the hourly rate of the national minimum wage as was proposed by the Low Pay Commission. This is not a new or novel departure. The Minister will know that I set that precedent back in 2015 in the context of the first report for the Low Pay Commission. It is positive that the principle of doing this is still respected. It is important that work always pays. It is important also to ensure that as much as possible of the increase due to national minimum wage workers goes directly into their pockets. That is a good thing. Beyond this, however, there are nothing but effective tax rises next year due to the refusal and failure to do indexation.”
“This Bill, along with other shortcomings in the 7 October budget, sees low- and middle-income citizens, frankly, left up the creek as costs rise and show no signs of stabilising or coming down. Of course, these losses will be exacerbated for working families next year with the decision to freeze tax bands and credits, and the Minister has explained why that is the case. In a comprehensive Bill, I want to limit my comments to two or three areas, that is, the taxation choices made by Government as proposed in this Bill, the impact on working people and the measures proposed in the Bill on housing more broadly. In the first instance, I will refer to section 2. The only positive adjustment made to the personal tax code for PAYE workers is the change made to the universal social charge, USC.”
“The thing that is about to be confirmed and nailed down in this Finance Bill and in the social welfare Bill shortly is the negative impact of budget 2026 on the finances of hundreds of thousands of households across Ireland next year. Thanks to budget 2026, there will be an average 2% income loss across households next year. The big losers will be low-income households who can ill-afford what will be for them a 2.5% drop in their incomes in 2026. In fact, when we factor in the loss of the once-off payments, this is the cohort that is most exposed with the withdrawal of temporary measures and budget and tax spending changes. This will lead to a 4.1% loss for them. We might compare this to a minuscule loss of 0.3% for higher-income households.”
“This is some distance from the €1.3 billion announced on Friday and, as the PBO said today at the Committee on Budgetary Oversight, more costly than first appears. Before I turn to the Bill itself, I wish to draw attention to the Economic and Social Research Institute's, ESRI's assessment of the budget, and it is stark. It said the fiscal stance is loose, the macroeconomy is not in need of Government support and that there is a "reliance on unpredictable corporation tax receipts" to fund spending and this is "a vulnerability". The pre-budget warnings went on to be ignored again and, as the Minister will know, this cannot continue.”
“There is little or nothing in the Bill that indicates that the Government is prepared to bite the bullet and prepare the ground to raise more revenue from more diverse sources as the threat to our corporation tax and from the demographic and climate challenges really hits home in the coming years. This is all against the backdrop of Ireland running a deficit once the windfall corporation tax receipts are excluded. According to the work of the Parliamentary Budget Office, PBO, in its post-budget analysis, there was a total of €434.2 million announced on budget day in revenue-raising measures, with a full-year cost of nearly €2.3 billion of tax cuts assessed over a full year of implementation.”
“This is a case of "Show me your budget and I will show you my priorities". Wider society and the real economy have no shortage of problems. In the Bill, the Government has picked a side. A mumbled election promise to the hospitality sector has been prioritised over meaningful progress on taking children out of poverty or providing some tax relief for working people in the middle of the cost-of-living crisis. There is a further narrowing of the tax base against a backdrop of constant reminders about the vulnerability of the very taxes we are relying on to run and develop the country into a truly rich republic.”
“For far too many people who work hard for a living, there is simply too much month at the end of the money. We have rising grocery costs, high energy prices – we are in the top three in Europe – a housing disaster that will have a long tail when it comes to its social and economic impact on citizens, and child poverty levels that challenge the rich country story we tell ourselves. All of this comes at a time of record corporation tax receipts and numbers of people at work. For the first time in this State's short history, we have had a decade or more of sustained economic growth. It is not a want of resources that is holding us back. Rather, it is an absence of vision, sclerotic delivery and a failure to better use the money we have. As I said on budget day, this was a budget for burger barons and big builders, all made true in this Bill.”
“I am pleased to speak on the Finance Bill. It gives effect to many of the announcements made in the budget two short weeks ago. If we needed any convincing that budget 2025 was all about the pending election, budget 2026, a bare budget for working people, and the associated Finance Bill prove the point beyond any doubt. This time last year, billions in once-off payments were thrown around in a transparent attempt to buy votes with our own money. There is little sign of support for struggling citizens today. The election might be over, but the cost-of-living crisis of recent years certainly is not. In fact, it has taken on a permanence that is dangerous to social cohesion and the promise of social mobility and progress that hard work used to offer in our society.”
“-----but a business cannot give Revenue the two fingers and get away with it. Before handing over to my colleague, Deputy Sherlock, I will conclude on this. It is disgraceful that this Government has decided it will keep what it describes as its solemn promise on VAT for the hospitality sector but will break a solemn promise it made to workers about introducing a living wage in 2026. Workers in this country have waited long enough for the dignity and fairness that comes with the introduction of a living wage. They also require moves to a European model of sick pay but that has also been shelved by the Government. That is on this Government and it is unacceptable. This is a Government that prioritises the needs of business and builders over the wider common good.”
“This is something that has been rejected by the Government and in this budget there is little sign of the kind of ambition we have been showing around investment in social housing, affordable housing and cost rental. However, I welcome two changes for which I have advocated for years. These are the extension of the living cities initiative to towns like Drogheda and Dundalk and the Government decision to answer our calls here in Labour and give Revenue the job of collecting derelict sites levies. Councils can be ignored-----”
“The tax strategy group papers state that a cut to VAT on all residential construction would cost around €800 million. How would this be done for apartments only? Many projects, as we know, have a commercial and retail element too. How will that work? What about mixed-use multi-unit developments including duplexes? This will have to be thought through and it seems to me that it has not been. Our housing crisis is a supply problem, plain and simple, and it is getting worse. The Labour Party, uniquely among the Opposition parties, actually supported the proposition of the Land Development Agency because we thought it had the prospect of evolving into what we have described as a State construction company.”
“I said here previously that the situation on housing is so desperate that if some form of tax incentive scheme, time-limited and with social conditions, that would focus on turning around vacant and derelict sites was proposed, the Labour Party would be prepared to take a considered view of it, such is the emergency in our country. However, a VAT cut is just bananas. It will feather the nests and bottom lines of developers. I am looking forward to seeing the advice from the Department of Finance officials on this ill-conceived proposal. This is the very last policy lever that should be used and it is a sign of desperation. Let us be clear that neither party in government ever sought a mandate for tax cuts for developers for smaller apartments, or garden sheds as housing solutions. Of course, this is back-of-the-envelope stuff.”
“Quite frankly, it is this nonsense that undermines faith in politics. Anything Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael have tried has failed but of course they will never fail in their fealty to the demands of developers. Apartment builders and landlords asked for changes to unit sizes, other planning law changes and amendments to RPZs, which really exposed renters. As we know this week, exposing renters is par for the course for Fianna Fáil. The Government has delivered on all three requests and now we have a VAT cut and other tax adjustments that were never asked for, with no guarantee of more supply. This is bone lazy policy.”
“Of course, we only get advance leaks of good plans. It is telling that all we have heard from Government on housing before this budget is talk of tax cuts for builders and Robert Troy having a pop at people in social housing. You would think that with his record, the Rigsby of the Dail would have been best served keeping his thoughts to himself. This budget contains little or nothing that will radically increase supply. The Government is simply all over the place on housing. You know you are in trouble when the Taoiseach launches an attack on councillors and officials for not zoning enough land. He needs to stop with the deflection and dishonesty that is his stock in trade. He needs to cop on and, for once in his political career, take some responsibility. Somehow with Micheál Martin, it is always somebody else’s fault.”
“We have had garden sheds in lieu of homes; slashed apartments standards; rushed changes to rent pressure zones, RPZs; €1.4 billion of capital top-ups because the Government got the sums so wrong last year; cuts to the tenant in situ lifeline; not enough money for housing adaptation grants; and most disgraceful of all, over 5,000 children in homeless accommodation. We have a housing Minister who is the very definition of an empty suit, missing in action. Most people could not pick him out of a line-up. A Government that could stand over the new plan we are told to expect would publish it well before the budget because that would help them lay out the spending and policy ambitions in it. Instead, the plan is being suppressed and kept under lock and key until the slow bicycle race to the park is done and dusted.”
“This target was in the first national children’s strategy signed off by the then Minister for health, Micheál Martin. Our child poverty scandal would look a lot different if we did not have such a problem with family homelessness and insecure housing. For a Government that says housing is its number one priority, it has a funny way of showing it. We managed to hear from two Ministers earlier on and not one of them mentioned homelessness. What an outrage. Since Fianna Fáil brazened its way through the general election telling porkies on housing targets, this has been the Government's record.”
“We would go further than the Government has done this year in terms of the welcome increases in child support payments, but we would also ensure that we had a living wage, do more on DEIS plus, which is a pioneering Labour initiative, and end voluntary contributions - all of the things that go in to making child poverty history. We would make education truly free and invest in our Cinderella youth services like never before. This is not a time for incrementalism and crippling caution. The response to child poverty demands urgency, courage and single-mindedness. Anything else is indifference and an unforgivable moral failure. There has been one consistent political figure at the top of national politics since the first child poverty target was introduced in 2000, 25 long years ago. Who is it? Micheál Martin.”
“You will find that is just rebranded. He has put together all of the initiatives we know are out there already and put a different label on them. That is insincere and indifferent. What is the difference between children in poverty and the hospitality sector? Poor kids do not have well-paid lobbyists and their families rarely vote for Fine Gael or Fianna Fáil. I actually believed Leo Varadkar, when he became Taoiseach again, when he said he wanted to do the business on child poverty. I was prepared to take that promise in good faith. I should have known better. The Labour Party would bite the bullet and allocate the €770 million for the second tier.”
“Nothing reeks of failure more than the numbers of children we have who are poor. This should have been a children’s budget but it is far from it. Over the last 20 years, child poverty levels have averaged 18.5%. Now, it is a scandalous 21%. One in five of the children we meet are in poverty. Poverty in childhood, and the embarrassment, stigma and shame that go along with it, follows children around for the rest of their lives. However, the embarrassment and shame ought to be on the Government. For a dozen years now we have known the solution. It gets fixed with a second tier of targeted child benefit, which happens to cost the same amount of money as a full year of VAT relief for the hospitality industry. I note there has been an announcement today from the Minister, Deputy Chambers, about a €300 million package for child poverty.”
“The Government is using the tax system to boost the bottom line of large takeaway businesses and the developers. Why not use it as we proposed, to providing an energy income tax credit to working families in draughty homes who are earning less than €80,000 a year? The Labour Party's idea would see €400 go back into the pockets of working people, in the same way that people are used to claiming annual medical relief, a carer's credit or the renter's credit. These are simple, straightforward and, most importantly, targeted reliefs. We have no difficulty saying we would put a 20% windfall levy on energy companies’ profits and a levy on data centres to pay for them - cost neutral to the State. This is the kind of real action that will keep people warm this winter.”
“There are a few bits and pieces on SEAI and little improvements to grants and so on, but what has also been revealed is a failure to understand the scale of the home energy crisis in Ireland in 2025. Mark my words, this is the thing that will drive people over the edge this winter. Here is the problem: they cannot afford to pay the bill and neither can they afford to do the retrofitting that is still out of the reach of so many. I urge Government to take our advice. We have proposed further extending the fuel allowance to all of those on working family payments. There have been some moves in that direction today and we will look in detail at what has been proposed but more needs to be done in terms of extending the period for which the fuel allowance is available.”
“The Government was throwing cash at a problem, never asking why we have the second highest energy costs in Europe, or why we have a regulator that routinely nods through savage price rises and fails miserably to honour its consumer protection role. The Government has failed to take a State-led approach like the Labour Party would in strategically investing €1 billion to make our moonshot moment in offshore wind a reality, weaning us off imported gas, which would be good for consumers and good for climate. With families and small businesses reeling from unaffordable price rises, the answer of the Minister, Deputy Darragh O'Brien, is “can anything be said for another task force?” Freezing families cannot heat their homes with reports from task forces.”
“The simple fact is that once the plethora of performative reliefs and stunts like help to buy, the apartment VAT relief and hospitality are accounted for, only about a third of this year’s €1.5 billion set aside on the tax front goes towards the common good via the renter's tax credit, which has been extended but the rate has not been increased, and the continuation of the VAT relief on energy bills. The story of this winter will be ever-rising energy bills. Without targeted action, the 170,000 in gas arrears and the 300,000 in electricity arrears will go up and up. This Government has made a rod for its own back. Even those who did not need them got its famously untargeted energy credits, when those who needed more were left to flounder. The credit papered over the cracks.”
“I sound like a broken record, but now, when the economy is running red hot, is the time to take counter-cyclincal and not pro-cyclical measures to dampen things down. Back in 2022 the Commission on Taxation and Welfare set out a menu of €14 billion of options for sustainable revenue-raising measures that would not harm jobs and enterprise. There are two reasons we should go for this. One, to broaden and diversify the tax base, and two, to help us meet the aging, climate and demographic challenges that are well and truly here.”
“IFAC, the usually demure, dismal scientists, waded in last week. They usually keep their mouths shut on policy pronouncements. They said that every tax cut or tax foregone comes at a cost. They set out alternative homes for this cash. Over 11,000 nurses could be hired, or 7,800 teachers. Critically, tax bands could be moved by €3,000, saving an average worker €600. As far as the Labour Party is concerned, IFAC is right, this money would be better spent supporting children and workers. Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil have made their bed. These measures are never temporary. The temporary help to buy scheme is still in, and will be extended. SARP was supposed to sunset this year and is being brought back in. It was meant to be given a decent burial but it is still here.”
“Food industry data suggests that about 40% of the benefit will go to the fast food multiples, with less than half going to the local independent restaurants and cafes we all want to see survive and thrive. The evidence for this is thin or non-existent. Even the man who launched the election campaign of the Minister, Deputy Burke, the one and only Michael O’Leary, said "this is a scam". That is what it is.”
“----to a sector that is adding jobs, and can boast more openings than closures. As it happens, almost the exact same amount of money is needed for a targeted second tier of child support to the poorest of families. This will be rolled over every year and the Government will get no change out of about €3 billion by the time it is done. That is €3 billion less for tax adjustments for working people and service improvements. The only people who think this is a good idea seem to be Simon Harris, Peter Burke and industry lobbyists. If this is the emergency we are told it is, why delay it until half way through next year? This is nothing but an old-fashioned stroke. At the top end, this is an industry that is super-profitable and is addicted to low pay. The likes of Supermac's posted pre-tax profits of €42 million in 2024.”
“The only certainty in all of this is that it will keep doing what it always does, add fuel to the house inflation fire. Well, this stupid relief has very serious competition this year. Say hello to the 9% reduced VAT rate for hospitality, a massive transfer of close to €700 million in a full year, from PAYE workers----”
“Looking at the budget presented today, several billion in windfall revenue will be spent next year. Corporation tax is actually bailing us out. Labour is a patriotic party. We want Ireland to succeed, but we must learn. We feel entitled to critique. We supported the setting up of the Future Ireland Fund and the Infrastructure, Climate and Nature Fund. These funds are important to insulate us against an uncertain future, but more can be done today to help protect our tomorrow. Professor Barra Roantree said two years ago that among the stupidest of tax reliefs in a competitive field was help to buy. This year, thanks to Simon Harris and his solemn promise made on the stump, that stupid tax wheeze and others are now being extended to 2030 to provide "certainty to developers".”
“A sign of our maturity as a country would be to agree that social protection rates need to be benchmarked and increased every year based on a mix of wage growth and a measurement of inflation. We should legislate for this, make that decision and wear it as the badge of honour of a decent society that wants to do better. We should do the same on income tax, too. For many years now, Ministers have been warning us about the vulnerabilities of our tax base. The concentration risks associated with corporation tax are well rehearsed. When we strip away the corporation tax froth, we are in the red to the tune of about €7 billion. When the music stops, as it inevitably will, it is not the well-heeled but the less well-off who will pay the price. The same Ministers again refuse to take their own advice.”
“Carers save the State €20 billion a year and for a fraction of that, we can ensure that every carer gets the financial recognition and support they need and that their selfless work deserves. Both Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil’s manifestos have variations of commitments in that direction. Incremental increases to income disregards are all well and good, and welcome, but we need to do more. I acknowledge the progress announced today. Labour also agrees that there are additional costs to living with a disability. There was nothing about that today from the Minister, Deputy Chambers. There is plenty of guff in the Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil manifestos. We would ensure an additional payment of €25 is made, to be brought in over two years, to recognise that reality. I say it every single year.”
“The core rates of child benefit have not gone up in a long, long time. We have had double payments in recent years but no permanent increases to the payment itself. If we are targeting, let us decide, as Labour did years ago, thanks to our colleague, Deputy Mark Wall, who really got this matter on the national agenda, to go the whole way this year and allocate the €330 million needed to get rid of the means test for the carers’ allowance.”
“The social welfare increases of €10 a week represents between a 3% and 4% increase, less than wage growth and certainly less than those who signed up to the pension promise would have delivered. Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil signed up to that pension promise. They have a lot of picking up to do over the next few years to reach that and to make sure their promises to pensioners are kept. These are the working poor, the most exposed by the decision not to make any extra payments to cover the cost of living in 2026. We did not hear from the Minister earlier about the household benefits package going up, for example. It has not gone up in 12 years. We would push it by €10 a week. The living alone allowance has not gone up in years. It should have gone up by at least a fiver to €27. We also believe child benefit should have gone up by €10.”
“I remember when Fianna Fáil used to care about the social protection system. Can someone do a welfare check on Willie O’Dea? Where is he? He must be mortified, absolutely embarrassed. When the Society of St. Vincent de Paul said €16 were needed to be added to every core weekly payment, we agreed. We made allowance for that in our costed alternative budget. As for Fine Gael, we had the usual pre-budget whining, pitting one section of welfare recipient against another, all for the headlines - nasty, unbecoming, divisive stuff. It never comes to pass, it is just for the headlines, shoring up their base. The pathetic increase this year will see citizens who rely on social welfare payments fall back.”
“The Government was literally running out of gimmick giveaways. At the time, the Opposition could not even keep up. There was the country's biggest ever social welfare package with €2.6 billion in total. I knew the social welfare talks were not going well when the Sunday newspapers were being briefed that there would be a Christmas bonus this year. Well done. Wow, congratulations, that is incredible. What an achievement. Is this what you have been reduced to this year? Trumpeting the fact that there is going to be a Christmas bonus that is actually paid out of this year's spending in the Department of Social Protection, the savings in the Department found down the back of the couch. It is absolutely pathetic. It is a pity there are no Fianna Fáil Ministers here, quite an insult to the Opposition, in fact.”