1. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance if there will be any public consultation prior to the launch of the savings and investment account scheme. [48238/26]
Sentiment score: 0.00
The Minister’s Department led a forum for stakeholders for representative bodies and policymakers in relation to the savings and investment accounts scheme under design. These voices, no doubt, have a role to play and a place in the discussion. A scheme of this scope, however, would traditionally have had a public consultation process, and that was not the case here. What engagement has there been with the public? What research has been done by the Minister or his Department on public views of how to design a savings and investment accounts scheme?
Sentiment score: 0.03
The Tánaiste is right in saying there has not been a public consultation in relation to this issue. The funds review was separate. It looked at the taxation aspect but did not argue for this type of savings and investment scheme.
Sentiment score: 0.12
That was not the consultation that was under review at that time. To tell the Minister the God’s honest truth, we know very little because we are still in the dark in relation to what this scheme is going to look like. We are told it is going to be announced on budget day. There has been no consultation with the public. There has been consultation with stakeholders, other groups, with very wealthy asset managers and so on. The Minister has had extensive meetings with asset managers, wealth managers, financial planners, digital platforms, banks and insurance firms but there has been no real engagement with the public. This is concerning, given that this is going to be a major scheme that will impact the public. We know from media reports that, for example, the largest asset management firm in the world, BlackRock, has had extensive meetings with the Department and Ministers. That type of extensive lobbying behind the scenes by some of the largest financial companies in the world raises legitimate questions about whether the public interest is being served. Why has there been no time for a public consultation when discussions have been going on behind closed doors with powerful financial interests for three years now, as we have learned from media reports?
Sentiment score: 0.29
We have discussed deemed disposal and how that could be changed, making sure it does not just benefit the ultra-rich and allow for the avoidance of tax on significant assets. There is a real question in relation to the public scrutiny of what is going on. The Minister said we know a lot but, in fairness, we do not. We do not know what the thresholds are going to be. We do not know what the rate is going to be. We do not know if there is going to be tax inside the investment. We do not know if it is going to be for investments in Ireland or investments internationally. There is a lot we do not know and there has been no public consultation. There is no opportunity for the public to actually formally feed in their views in relation to this proposal. From the very start, we have said this scheme needs to meet two criteria. It needs to work for ordinary people. It cannot be a way for the rich to avoid tax and, effectively, get a tax cut. It also needs to have a public investment aspect. There are also, however, serious risks. The Central Bank warned about the bubble in artificial intelligence, AI, and inflated values in relation to some of the products in that area. Investment is not for everybody. Investment contains risks, so there are serious questions in relation to how this scheme will be designed and implemented, and it needs to have proper public scrutiny. I urge the Minister, therefore, to formally open a public consultation process to allow for ordinary people to give their views in relation to what is under consideration.
Sentiment score: 0.03
What about public consultation?
Sentiment score: 0.00
3. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance to outline his approach to excise duty on fuel from the end of July. [48239/26]
Sentiment score: 0.00
I am trying to get to the bottom of what the Minister's intentions are for excise duty. Last week, he passed the Finance Bill in the House, and that Bill will see the price of diesel increased by 32 cent and the price of petrol increased by 27 cent. That is just a number of weeks away, on 1 August. People are aghast at the idea that in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis prices would rise again. In some cases, prices will go up to €2 per litre, given where they are at the moment. The Finance Bill is going through the Dáil. It will go through the Seanad and then become law. Can the Tánaiste rule out its taking effect on 1 August or is that still his thinking? People need a bit of clarity.
Sentiment score: 0.02
I am well aware of the legislation, the 1920s Act which requires financial resolutions to be put into primary legislation within four months. The reality is that the Government last week voted against deferring the increase until budget day. As things currently stand in Irish tax law, diesel will go up by 32 cent and petrol will go up by 27 cent in August. The Dáil is only sitting for another three weeks. There are people and businesses, including hauliers, that have to plan. They are wondering about the contracts and commitments into which they are entering. They are thinking that because the cost of diesel is going up, prices must go up. There are contractors, construction workers, who are taking on jobs and do not know what the price will be. Will the Tánaiste rule out a 32-cent increase in the cost of diesel on 1 August? Is that his thinking at this point? Can he give some parameters? We know that things are fluid. We know that fuel prices are set by international energy prices, which themselves are reacting to geopolitical events. What I argued for initially was that there would be parameters there. For example, we could say that we would not want diesel to go above €1.80 or €1.85, or whatever. The law is saying that the cost will go up by 32 cent. That is worrying for people in the middle of this cost-of-living crisis.
Sentiment score: -0.00
First of all, that does not provide the clarity that is needed. This is not as simple as the Tánaiste said, which was that this was putting the resolution into primary legislation.
Sentiment score: -0.15
It is not.
Sentiment score: 0.00
The Government voted against delaying this measure until budget day. It voted against not increasing costs on 1 August. That is what happened last week. The Tánaiste was not here, was he?
Sentiment score: 0.00
Perhaps the Tánaiste was not here. Let us be clear: that was what the vote was last week. Amendments were put down to defer this measure until budget day for consideration so that these increases would not happen when the Dáil was on holidays. If the Government decides to increase the costs of petrol and diesel, even if it decides that they will only go up by 20 cent, we do not know what is going to happen the week prior to that and the Dáil will not be sitting. The sensible thing to do was to accept what Sinn Féin put forward and not to have prices going up in the middle of the summer when the Dáil is not even sitting. Defer it. I put that amendment down and the Government voted against it. The Labour Party and Social Democrats supported the Government in voting against it and I think that was absolutely wrong. I am now asking the Tánaiste to commit that we will not see price increases in the middle of the summer, not knowing where the geopolitical issue will be, whether the Strait of Hormuz will be open or whether retail prices will be €1.80. €1.60 or €1.50. We will have no idea. Will the Tánaiste give some clarity in that regard?
Sentiment score: 0.12
There was a vote on the amendment.
Sentiment score: 0.00
Is the Dáil going to sit?
Sentiment score: 0.00
Sorry, is the Dáil sitting on 1 August?
Sentiment score: -0.08
Perhaps the Tánaiste will clarify. Is the Dáil now going to sit? Is this the Government announcing that the Dáil will be sitting on 1 August to respond?
Sentiment score: 0.00
Is that what the Tánaiste is going to say?
Sentiment score: 0.00
5. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance his views on the most appropriate way to deliver a fair tax package for workers that ensures an equitable distribution of the benefit. [48240/26]
Sentiment score: 0.22
The Tánaiste has made it public that he plans to bring forward tax cuts in this year's budget after leaving workers worse off in last year's budget. That is according not only to Sinn Féin but also to the Economic and Social Research Institute, ESRI. In the election campaign, the Government parties promised to bring forward tax cuts every year and broke that promise to workers and families. The fact that workers were left worse off last year is why it is even more important that any tax package for workers is fair and works for all workers. Does the Tánaiste accept we need a fair tax package? How does he see that being achieved?
Sentiment score: 0.06
When Fine Gael has brought forward tax packages, they have always been two-tier tax packages, which means those on the higher end benefit more than those on the lower end. About half of the workforce benefits far more than the other half. A worker on €50,000 gets a tax cut multiple times larger than a worker on €40,000. I understand the challenges in adjusting tax bands and adjusting for inflation. It is not simple, but there are ways in which it is possible. For example, more focus on the USC and tax credits would make a far better impact for those on lower and middle incomes than simply dealing with the bands. Will the Tánaiste ensure that the half of workers who earn €44,000 or less get a fair tax package compared with people who earn €50,000, €90,000 or €300,000? The packages the Government has brought forward have been unfair in the past, in that the half of the workforce that earns less than that level of €44,000-----
Sentiment score: 0.14
-----got far less than they should have.
Sentiment score: 0.00
I am not dismissing anything. What I am saying is that the Government has consistently brought forward tax packages that are two-tier. For example, the Tánaiste talked about the entry point to the higher rate. If that is focused on instead of USC or tax credits, there will be winners and losers. The winners will be the half of the population who earn more than €44,000 and the losers will be those who earn less than €44,000. What is the better way? When I talk to constituents who earn €60,000 and would benefit from an increase to the entry point to the higher band, they do not really care whether it is the entry point to the band, or USC or tax credits. All they care about and know is that they are paying too much tax for what they are getting back. They want more money in their pockets at the end of the week, better services and all that. The fairest way to do that is to make sure the Government does not spend a large portion of what is available for tax reductions just on the workers who earn more than €44,000. USC is the best way to make sure there is an impact for all people. We have said clearly in our policy-----
Sentiment score: 0.34
-----that the first €45,000 of income should be exempt from USC. That can be started in an emergency budget.
Sentiment score: -0.14
It should be followed up in the October budget. These types of measures benefit all workers as opposed to a proposal that will benefit only some.
Sentiment score: 0.36
I am not looking for another budget. I am looking for one.
Sentiment score: 0.00
Of course there is a legitimate policy debate. That is what we are having.
Sentiment score: 0.00
Now you are interrupting me.
Sentiment score: -0.30
That is the debate we are having. The reality is that some people win out more than others. That is also the reality. Let us not pretend that does not exist. What I am saying is the best way to deal with it is through the USC. The people who earn €60,000 or €70,000 would benefit along with the people who earn €30,000 or €40,000, rather than if the Government overly focuses on the bands. I am not saying it should dismiss doing anything with the bands, but every time it has brought forward a package, it has been in that regard. That is why we need a fair budget. I could stand here and remind the Tánaiste of his campaigning. I campaign for an emergency budget, but not a different budget every day. People need a cost-of-living intervention right now. They cannot wait until 1 January for tax adjustments to happen. That is legitimate. Do not tell me what I can and cannot do. I represent people who are pushed to the pin of their collar because of the Government's decisions and broken promises. Does the Tánaiste want me to remind him of them? One was that the Government would deliver a tax package every year for workers. It broke that promise. Remember the time the Tánaiste and Fine Gael paraded around with placards saying, "We will abolish the USC". Remember the pictures of that. That is another broken promise. I could list all that out, but what this question is about is delivering a fair tax package for workers-----
Sentiment score: 0.10
-----to make sure the Government does not deliver the two-tier system it has previously------
Sentiment score: 0.32
-----and to impress on the Tánaiste that the USC and tax credits are the best way to deliver a fair package.
Sentiment score: 0.90