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 8 of 15.
“The claims that fox hunting builds confidence in horses or resilience in humans are also not supported by behavioural science. High-stress environments actually inhibit learning. What is often labelled as bravery is more accurately explained by learned helplessness, a state associated with welfare risks and increased injury. While time in nature, physical activity and social connection are absolutely beneficial to mental health, none of these outcomes depend on the pursuit and the killing of wildlife. Ethical community-building and well-being must not be achieved through harm to sentient beings that cannot consent. Fox hunting is frequently defended as essential to rural community life, yet participation requires significant financial and social capital, placing it beyond the reach of most people, certainly the people I represent.”
“I have received messages from people I know and respect in recent days asking me to think of the hounds and what they do naturally and I have one message for people listening in. If these kinds of so-called rural pursuits are ended, they will evolve and they will change. That is an intrinsic part of nature, of who we are as human beings and what mammals do. Supporters of fox hunting often argue that banning the practice would mean horses and hounds would no longer exist. This is a false dilemma, a false dichotomy. Ending a harmful practice does not require the destruction of the animals involved or make them obsolete in any way. Nature evolves, and their value and the value of each animal endures beyond their limited, in this context, economic function to some. This applies to dogs too.”
“This suffering is intentional and intrinsic to the activity. I am no agricultural expert and do not claim to be but I know gratuitous cruelty when I see it. Horses used in hunts are also placed under extreme physical and psychological strain. They are pushed to gallop long distances over uneven ground, jump obstacles at speed and suppress natural fear responses in chaotic environments. This exposes them to a high risk of injury, exhaustion, chronic stress and fatal accidents. Hounds are also subjected to welfare risks. They are bred, trained and worked in ways that prioritise performance over well-being, often resulting in injury, exhaustion and premature death. Their natural behaviours are exploited and they are placed in dangerous situations over which they have no control.”
“There has always been something of the upstairs-downstairs about this and a nonsense we used to see in the stage Irishman depiction of fox hunting in the likes of "The Irish R.M." and so on. It is absolute nonsense and far from republican. The historical context of fox hunting in Ireland cannot be ignored. The Irish Masters of Foxhounds Association was established in 1845, during the Great Famine, and the practice itself is deeply rooted in colonial power structures. This is not a neutral or ancient Irish tradition; it is an imported phenomenon and a colonial blood sport imported and maintained by privilege. From an animal welfare perspective, the harms associated with fox hunting are simply unavoidable. Foxes endure prolonged pursuit, intense fear and physiological stress before often being violently killed.”
“As a sportsperson, I am not inclined to sanitise this pursuit by calling it a sport. Some 98% of people have no connection to it whatsoever - never have, never will - and the numbers will diminish. A practice engaged in by such a small minority cannot reasonably be described as essential to rural life. Farmers themselves have not demanded this practice be preserved. Many I know have raised serious concerns about hunts trespassing on land, damaging crops, frightening livestock and undermining biodiversity. This is not a harmonious rural tradition; it is an imposition that many rural communities actively oppose. There is a class context to this too. Let us not forget that or pretend otherwise.”
“We continue to hear claims, often repeated without any evidence whatsoever, that fox hunting is vital for farmers or essential to rural life. If fox control is required, farmers already have lawful, proportionate and humane means to address it. Organised fox hunting with packs of hounds is not, as was said earlier, an effective or humane method of wildlife management. It is the definition, in fact, of inefficiency. A chaotic chase involving dozens of dogs and riders pursuing a single animal cannot credibly be described as pest control. It is neither targeted nor evidence based and it results in extreme suffering. The claim that fox hunting is central to farming or rural culture is also contradicted by the evidence. In fact, only around 2% of the population has ever participated in a fox hunt.”
“I see that "rural pursuits" now seems to be a catch-all phrase to justify anything at all that happens in rural Ireland. Again, that does rural Ireland and the people I represent in rural Ireland an absolute disservice. They are not a monolithic, homogenous group. The public mood on this issue is clear, as was said earlier. A recent national opinion poll conducted by Ireland Thinks found that 72% of the Irish public support a ban on fox hunting. Importantly, this opposition is strong in rural Ireland itself. This is not, as I said, a rural-urban divide. I am proud to represent parts of rural County Louth and have done so for over two decades now. Yet that consensus is not reflected in the political debate.”
“It has, in our view, no place whatsoever in a modern republic that claims to value compassion, evidence-based policymaking and respect for animal welfare. There is nothing republican about fox hunting. Conservatism again trumps republicanism. In recent weeks, my office, along with others, has received hundreds of emails calling for an end to fox hunting. Many of these messages come from constituents who have witnessed hunts at first hand. Their accounts strip away the romanticised language often used to defend this indefensible activity. They describe exhausted animals pursued for hours, terrified livestock, damaged land and an organised spectacle of violence presented - or misrepresented - as tradition. This is not wildlife management; it is cruelty.”
“I will speak today on behalf of the Labour Party to express our strong support for the Animal Health and Welfare (Ban on Fox Hunting) Bill 2025. I want to thank our colleagues for proposing it. This legislation is not about point-scoring, nor is it about rural Ireland versus urban Ireland. To say it is actually diminishes the points that some who oppose this legislation are seeking to make. It is fundamentally about decency, ethics and whether we are prepared to legislate in line with what we say are stated public values and with modern animal welfare standards. It is first and foremost a moral question. Fox hunting is an anachronistic and inherently cruel practice that belongs to a past defined by hierarchy, elitism, exclusion, imperialism and the routine acceptance of animal suffering.”
“Instead of tax cuts and once-off payments to lessen the blow, it is affordable homes and decent universal public services - the kind which their peers in other wealthy countries have and take for granted - that they expect, and should be entitled to expect from a good government that has their backs. It is not much to ask in a country that is wealthier economically than it has ever been, and when we are debating, as we are today, the general allocation of resources in the broad sense. Our absolute focus in the future needs to be on investment in universal public services that work, and that are accountable, to give some hope of a better, fairer future for every citizen of this country.”
“Then we have people on middle incomes, many of whom I have never seen as angry and frustrated as they are now. They see an economy that is objectively doing well but they do not feel that is the case for themselves. That is not their own experience. They are dealing with what I might term broken promises on reducing childcare costs. We will see what the Government publishes tomorrow in its childcare plan. People spend endless hours in cars driving from a home that is some distance from where they want to live to jobs where the salary would ordinarily have guaranteed them a good life, but now it does not.”
“We need to be clear that the frayed social contract can only be repaired if we get better at generating and allocating the resources we need to make sure that everyone feels they have a stake in this evermore complex society. I will explain what I mean when I talk about a three-tier society. The resources of the top 10% of asset owners and income earners mean they have only heard mere talk of a cost-of-living and housing crisis. It has never visited their door. We have a cohort of people where the idea of a cost-of-living crisis now has a real permanence in their lives, and where the State needs to offer a better, more hopeful future for them and their children, as their prospect of progress seems more remote from their reality with every passing day.”
“For example, not all pledged tax expenditure reviews were published. We are also reminded that there have been no spending review papers published for 2025. This is really unforgivable in the current environment and it needs to change fast. Never before have we spent more as a country, yet there is an evident frustration that I have not seen for some time, if at all, about how the country simply is not working in a way that a rich country should. We are used to seeing Ireland as a two-tier country, but in my experience in recent times a three-tier Ireland is emerging. We are speaking about the Appropriation Bill, which in general terms is about spending and the allocation of resources.”
“For this year's budget, it says "there is a noticeable absence of transparent, data-driven analysis to underpin fiscal decisions." It also states there is "now no separation between the allocation given for new measures and funding required to maintain ELS, with the exception of the pay deal impact and carryover costs." Again this is not in any way an academic point, as it makes it difficult for all of us to conclude if the spending we are doing for this year and next year will in fact keep the show on the road at all. Will it help us to meet the challenges we have? Do we need more or less? What is the objective situation? It is hard to be definitive. Similarly, there are criticisms of what is termed the weak evidence base to inform some decisions contained in the PBO's analysis.”
“For years, we have all been working on the basis that the summer economic statement was the gospel, published well ahead of the October budget, allowing for clear data on ELS for the subsequent year, and making it clear as well what fiscal space was available, on a more or less no-policy-change basis – in other words, what would be available for extra spending and additional tax-cutting measures when everything else is accounted for to keep the show on the road and meet evolving demographic needs. Clear data and better Dáil scrutiny of the data and figures would also help to keep the Opposition honest. It is not just about keeping the Government honest but about having an informed debate in this House on agreed numbers. The post-budget analysis of the Parliamentary Budget Office, PBO, does not pull any punches.”
“There is a worrying opaqueness about how we allocate resources, and how we plan. Time and again, I have criticised the opacity around the presentation of the cost, for example, of maintaining existing levels of service, ELS. This is not an abstract point. It goes to the heart of the budgetary process. It suits the Government to be less than clear about what it costs to maintain basic levels of health, education and spending on other services, so it can juggle with the numbers, make itself look more responsible than it is, or alternatively pull some rabbits out of hats on or near budget day.”
“I have said time and again that we cannot spend more and cut taxes at the same time, put that approach on a continuous rinse-and-repeat cycle, and expect an outcome that does not prove to be negative in the end. That is all at the same time as our tax base is at mortal risk. Given what we have seen in the last few budgets, Paschal was not prudent, and with his signature VAT cut for the burger barons, neither was Simon as sensible as the moniker he has given himself suggests. The Dáil needs to exercise its rights and constitutional functions when it comes to accountability for our public spending. This is precisely why I will shortly be publishing legislation to establish an office of an Estimates commissioner, which will greatly enhance the capacity and function of the Dáil to keep the Government honest on its in-year spending plans.”
“We know for example that this year's budget saw total spending up by 12% on the 2025 Estimates. In budget 2026, we saw the largest allocation of public money ever, beating last year's record. That is required to meet the social and economic demands of a growing country, and the growing demands of the populace. It was a budget of over €9 billion, comfortably beating the last one, yet working people are still likely to be worse off than they were, largely thanks to decisions made on wasteful tax cuts brought in at the behest of noisy lobbyists. Responsible budgeting does not mean cuts. There should be no confusion about this. We can have responsible fiscal management and social and economic progress, imagination and innovation at the same time. They are not mutually exclusive. It is not a zero-sum game.”
“The reality is that the Executive sees the Dáil merely as a rubber-stamping Chamber. This is bad for our democracy and for the principle of good fiscal management. This year again, we were asked to nod through substantial Supplementary Estimates that are cumulatively the equivalent of the amount of revenue raised in corporation tax in any one year just over a decade ago. This puts the position we are in into some kind of context. Whether Ministers have the will to stay within the tramlines next year is an open question. We have a situation now in Ireland where budgets, as I have said repeatedly, have become works of fiction as Ministers have shown themselves incapable of responsibly controlling spending and staying within the confines of the sizeable allocations announced 13 or 14 months prior.”
“The bizarre thing is that there is little or no real debate in this Chamber or in the line committees on the nature of the requests from Ministers for extra allocations. This has become an-all-too-frequent occurrence and now an almost routine part of the annual budgetary process. That this is the case raises very serious questions about how we do the people's business. It would be useful to have access to the Revised Estimates for 2026 in advance of a debate of this nature, so we can look at spending on a multi-annual basis in the round and make some comparisons. It is worth reminding ourselves that it is the constitutional function of TDs and the Dáil collectively to scrutinise Estimates, to amend and pass the annual budget and to hold the Executive to account.”
“We care about the future of the country, and we will not play opportunistic politics with a plan of this nature, but we will relentlessly hold the Government to account on any slippage and on any failures. This is far too serious a plan and far too serious a situation for us not to do that. To a degree, this kind of debate is almost at odds with the growing pattern evident in recent years of the weakening of the transparency framework around framing budgets and indeed the presentation and debating of spending plans, annual Estimates and Supplementary Estimates. This year the Dáil has been expected to approve, on the nod, Supplementary Estimates totalling around €4 billion. While this might be down on last year's figure, it is still an extraordinary ask of our National Parliament.”
“We in the Labour Party have given the general approach of the plan a measured and calibrated welcome, with some caveats in relation to what we view as dangerous limitations being placed on the right of citizens in this Republic to access what we might term environmental justice and to have access to the courts on important matters of justice and rights. Such is the dire situation with the delivery of housing, offshore energy, transport projects and so on, which are key to our economic performance and the success of our society, that any plan that envisages a new mission-orientated approach should be given a chance. Ministers and senior officials seem prepared to be accountable - in the truest sense of the word - for failure. A plan should be given a chance to prove its worth and value.”
“Constitutionally, it is our job as Members of the Dáil to do so. There are few measures contained in the Bill that anyone will disagree with and nobody has any issue whatsoever with the Bill going through. I hope I speak for everyone in opposition on that count. It will ensure moneys are available into early next year to pay public servants, keep services going and provide for the carryover, within reason, of capital, accepting the complex and multi-annual nature of important capital projects. It will also ensure core social welfare payments are made seamlessly at the beginning of the new year. On the capital side, we ought to have a Dáil debate on our return in January on the recently published Accelerating Infrastructure plan. Such a debate has not yet happened.”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Bill. I recall the rushed nature of the debate on the corresponding Bill on the eve of the general election last November. As has been said on many occasions over the years, this legislation is, to some degree, a housekeeping exercise, as reflected in the Minister's comments, but it is nevertheless important that we have a Dáil debate on the matters the Bill addresses more broadly. As previous speakers noted, it was not that not long ago that the Dáil did not debate appropriations of this nature at all, with annual appropriations simply being nodded through. Our consideration of the Appropriation Bill allows us to take stock and think for a minute about the direction of public spending and how and why we allocate resources. That is the very essence of politics.”
“Excuse me. Did the Leas-Cheann Comhairle hear that comment from Deputy Ward? He referred to my colleague in unparliamentary terms. That needs to be withdrawn immediately. That kind of conduct is not acceptable in the Parliament. It may be acceptable for some on a Thursday, who are only interested in getting clips for social media. They ought to conduct themselves in a parliamentary fashion and respect all colleagues.”
“I ask and urge the Minister to look again at ensuring the revenues generated and collected are returned to local authorities like the local property tax, by and large.”
“The reality is that the Revenue Commissioners are the best-placed agency to collect a levy that will be transformed into a tax for a number of different reasons. Any business owner I know needs to sweat every asset they have. If it is a case that somebody is wealthy enough to be able to preside over a derelict site without using that site to generate some revenue, they must have very deep pockets. Of course, if Revenue is collecting your tax and you are not compliant, then you cannot run your businesses. I get what the Minister is saying in terms of that disincentive piece, which is important, like the vacant homes tax. It is not about collecting tax; it is about incentivising use.”
“The Minister will know how this works. He will know about the ineffective nature of the Derelict Sites Act and the need for reform in that space. When a local authority identifies an owner of a derelict site or property and, after due process, decides to place that site on a register, the individual may decide to contest that. It then becomes complicated. He or she may potentially challenge the designation of a derelict site through the courts and communities become frustrated. Dereliction itself is an absolute scourge, regardless of the housing disaster we are experiencing at the moment. It is a public health matter. In fact, the Scottish Administration has designated dereliction as a public health issue, and for very good reasons.”
“Given the fact that we have derelict sites registers available to local authorities across the country, although they may need to be finessed, I do not accept for a minute, given the urgency of this matter, that we ought to wait until 2027 until Revenue has responsibility for collecting these charges.”
“There is concern at official level in local authorities that it may not be the case that the revenue collected will be dispersed directly back to the local authorities where the subject sites are present. The Minister will understand those concerns. I draw some analogies between the transfer of the household charge, which the Minister will recall from the early 2010s, to the local property tax and how compliance improved. In fact, the transformation of the household charge to the property tax was quite successful from a collection point of view, looking at the compliance figures compared to the collection of the household charge, which was the responsibility of the local authorities at that point in time. It was for good reason that responsibility was transferred. It was done expeditiously and efficiently in a short period of time.”
“A welcome announcement at least was made in the budget in October that this Government would plan to transfer responsibility for collecting derelict sites levies to the Revenue Commissioners and, from then on, the levy would be known as a tax, given the fact that it would be collected by the Revenue Commissioners. This is a welcome development and something for which I have been campaigning and advocating for many years. One of the key things in this regard is that the revenue collected ought to be dispersed directly back to the local authorities involved. The Minister might advise on the position in that regard and what he plans to do to legislate for this announcement that was made in budget 2026.”
“She has outlined the process we are in at the moment. This is welcome. We in Labour will work with her to deliver a better system of healthcare for trans people in our society, the kind of system this Republic and its citizens demand.”
“There can be no postcode lottery when it comes to access to healthcare, nor can it depend on the whim of any one medical professional. As the Minister has heard from my colleagues, this one case is unfortunately broadly representative of many people's struggles to access basic decent healthcare with dignity and equality. As was said earlier, our record in this country in this area is appalling. We are well behind our European neighbours. We need to do better, as the Minister and the Minister of State, Deputy Butler, have acknowledged. This is not only a trans issue; it is a human rights issue. We either believe in equal access to appropriate healthcare for all our citizens or we do not. Rights are not to be debated. They are inherent. The Minister accepts that the situation needs to change.”
“Barrier after barrier was put in front of this trans woman to simply continue the treatment she had been properly prescribed for the previous nine years simply because she decided to move to a new area. Doctors are judging patients when they should be caring for them. She tells me that if she does not continue her hormonal treatment, she risks a range of severe health risks ranging from osteoporosis to cardiovascular issues, depression and cognitive decline. Like many caught in the same position, she is actively considering sourcing her hormones online, with all of the risk and lack of regulation that entails. That is not something anyone can stand over but she is being driven to at least consider doing it.”
“That was all fine until she decided to move and had to register with a new GP, who simply refused to continue prescribing HRT unless she saw an endocrinologist, despite her having a stable and long-term prescription. As one can imagine, this threw this woman into a cycle of health roadblocks and frustration. Her new GP refused to prescribe HRT and passed the buck to an endocrinologist. In turn, the endocrinologist at her new hospital passed the buck and demanded unredacted psychiatric reports from almost a decade ago that included all kinds of deeply private and traumatic details of her history. This is not an isolated case. It is all too common and it is not on.”
“At the outset, I will say to the Minister that words count and leadership matters. I thank the Minister for calling out the inhumanity and cruelty that is so sadly being imported into this country and mimicked by some of those who should know better. Those people need to act and behave with more responsibility in respect of their fellow citizens. As with everyone else in our State, the level of access trans people have to healthcare depends at least in part on the attitude of their medical professionals. We cannot allow that to continue to be the case. Care is not consistent. For example, in my office, we have been dealing with the case of a trans woman who transitioned nine years ago and was discharged from the national gender service post surgery with instructions for her GP to manage her ongoing hormone therapy.”
“Will the Tánaiste elaborate on how this scheme managed to escape the net? One would imagine that when the scheme of sanctions and other measures were introduced, a very extensive audit would have been undertaken by the Government of all measures applying to Russia and where any benefits might accrue to Russia, that would be a red flag. It is curious this provision has remained in place for so long. The Tánaiste might be able to elaborate on why that is the case. It may just be a sin of omission. I accept and completely understand that errors are sometimes made. For the most recent year for which we have figures, no recipient with any links to Russia was captured by the scheme, and this may well have been also the case in 2022 and before then. That may be why Russia has remained as a country included in the scheme.”
“The Deputy's point about companies not involved in exports being capable of benefiting from the scheme is interesting in that the scheme is principally designed to support businesses that are operating or seeking to operate in new and emerging markets. Its purpose is to encourage market diversification. That is why we must be vigilant and must continue to review schemes like this. To build on a comment made by Deputy O'Callaghan, I am intrigued as to why Russia has remained in the scheme for so long, given what we know, what the people of Ukraine are experiencing and that the international community has turned its back on Russia and is treating it as the pariah state it is. We have the sanctions regime and various other measures being taken against the Russian state because of what it is doing to Ukraine.”
“Far be it from me to answer a question for the Tánaiste but it would be technically difficult to make that change mid-year. That aside, the case is well made for removing Russia from the scheme. As Deputy O'Callaghan and others have said, we are concerned that it has managed to remain as a state covered by the scheme despite the illegal invasion of Ukraine and the illegal activities and war crimes being perpetrated against the Ukrainian people by the Russian state. The Tánaiste said that in the year for which we have the most recent data, no claims were made in connection with Russia. That in itself is interesting. Deputy Doherty made the relevant point that we must remain vigilant about this particular scheme. It covers an extensive number of countries and should be open to regular review.”
“This is an area ripe for further focus from the Department of Finance and the Department of enterprise. It is an area that the Labour Party is interested in. We see this, in many ways, as the next frontier in the development of, dare I say it, stakeholder capitalism and evolving that idea of workplace democracy to meet the needs of the 21st century. This meets the needs of companies and staff and it helps to retain good, skilled staff in very competitive environments. This is an area we wish to see further explored by the Department and the Minister during his term.”
“The options are limited for people when they want to sell their business on. There is often an ambition to keep the business and ownership in Ireland, but those prospects can be very limited and limiting. In my experience, entrepreneurs who run and develop these companies, especially in the tech sector and so on, are often quite socially conscious and understand that their staff are a key component of the development and evolution of their business. Therefore, when they scale up, they want to see their staff succeed as well. One of the barriers to ensuring that staff can have a function in owning part of the company is the taxation treatment of members of employee share ownership trusts. Significant work has been undertaken in the UK in this regard and improvements have been seen in the landscape there in recent years.”
“We have looked very closely at this area and I know the officials in the Department have as well, based on the discussions we had on Committee Stage with the Minister’s predecessor. Officials have looked at this in the Department. I know the Department of enterprise is looking at this whole space of employee share ownership trusts as well. Deputy Lawlor will speak much more eloquently than I on this particular issue, given the experience he has on the matter. We know that our indigenous enterprise sector could do better. There are challenges when indigenous enterprises and high-potential start-ups seek to scale up. In the engagements I have had over many years with business owners in my constituency, and from the period I spent in the Department of enterprise, I am familiar with the challenge to raise revenue and expand.”
“I move amendment No. 3: In page 8, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following: “Report on employee share ownership trusts 4. The Minister shall, within 12 months of the passing of this Act, lay a report before Dáil Éireann on any proposals to amend Chapter 2 of Part 17 and Schedule 12 of the Principal Act, relating to employee share ownership trusts, so as to facilitate the establishment of a greater number of such trusts and their smooth and efficient functioning.”. My colleague, Deputy Lawlor, will be contributing to this debate as well. He has done significant work in this whole area of employee share ownership trusts, ESOTs. In my view, this is an underdeveloped area of the Irish economy.”
“We would also then have a genuine discourse about other priorities in terms of taxation, tax and spending, accepting that indexation would be done as a matter of course in the context of the personal tax system for PAYE workers and social welfare, which is an area I accept the Minister is not responsible for. It is a point worth making that when we index tax, we should also, from the point of view of social and economic equity, index core social welfare weekly rates.”
“I did it again this year on Committee Stage and am doing so now on Report Stage. My proposal is that the best mechanism for setting out a commitment to indexation is the summer economic statement. If there is another mechanism to do it, I am all ears. I am open to persuasion on that. Indexation would give certainty to workers and the economic planning systems in this country. It also would ensure that, every year, when we engage in the process in the run-up to the budget and then get to debate the budget, we would be doing two things, namely, indexing tax bands and rates and indexing social welfare rates. Then, we would have a genuine discussion and open public debate in this House about how we raise revenue to provide the resources we need to expand our public services.”
“What is also done routinely is indexation of social welfare payments. If we commit to indexation in the context of the tax system, the corollary must be that we do the same when it comes to core weekly social welfare rates to ensure nobody is left behind. I have listed the countries that do this routinely on Committee Stage and in other forums. They do so on the basis that it gives certainty to governments, workers and employers. The budget in October was marketed by the Government as a pro-business budget. What will happen next year, as a result of the Government's failure to implement indexation this year, is we will see increased wage demands on the very same employers it says it wants to support. That will be the reality. I have requested this measure time and again.”
“The Government further decided, in its wisdom, to introduce VAT cuts that would have a substantial cost to the Exchequer and would involve a very large wealth transfer from working people to the developer sector. Those cuts, the Government hopes and says without necessarily any evidence to back it up, are designed to boost apartment supply and the viability of the sector. We all know they are about boosting the bottom line of development companies. In recent years, I have, for good reason, made the proposal set out in my amendment No. 2. It is a responsible proposition. Some of the countries against which we like to compare ourselves have automatic systems of indexation built into their systems of governance and financial planning. Indexation is done routinely and annually.”
“In the context of the cost-of-living crisis we are experiencing, it will be a particularly challenging year for those workers. The reality is that if the Government, during the next four years, is to meet the commitments it made previously, it will require a very significant amount of heavy lifting in budget 2027 and beyond. That is if it does what it committed to do, which is to move to index tax bands and credits incrementally over the next few years. Of course, budgets and Finance Bills, and politics more generally, are about choices. With the limited resources available to the Government this year in the taxation space, it decided, in its wisdom, to introduce an untargeted VAT rate cut for the hospitality sector. That particular cut will disproportionately benefit larger organisations operating in this country.”
“As discussed in reference to the previous amendment, middle-income workers, especially those who expect to receive modest pay increases of 3%, 4% or 5%, will, in effect, see tax rises next year because of the failure of the Government in the context of October's budget and the provisions in this Bill to index tax bands and credits to accommodate and take into account those pay increases. As outlined, commitments were made by the Tánaiste in the context of the general election campaign 12 months ago. Indeed, there are references in the programme for Government to the ambition to introduce indexation for working people over the next few years. The reality is that because there is no form of indexation in the Finance Bill, there will, in effect, be tax increases for a whole swathe of middle-income workers next year.”
“I move amendment No. 2: In page 8, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following: "Report on taxation and cost of indexation 4. The Minister and the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation shall include in their Summer Economic Statement in each year a report setting out the estimated cost to the Exchequer of adjusting— (a) tax rate bands and tax credits and allowances in relation to income tax, and (b) benefits and allowances payable under the Social Welfare Acts, to reflect any changes in the All Items Consumer Price Index numbers published by the Central Statistics Office in the 12 months before the date of the Statement.".”