136. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance if he will bring forward an emergency budget to help people deal with the cost of living. [39713/26]
Sentiment score: 0.01
I ask the Tánaiste again to review the decision not to have an emergency budget. It is absolutely crucial. What was announced last October in the budget left people worse off. It is not just Sinn Féin saying this - we saw in the Economic and Social Research Institute, ESRI, analysis of the budget that families were left worse off and those on lower incomes were worse off. Added to that, inflation is running at nearly double what was projected on budget day. People cannot wait until next year until the Government brings forward the budget. They need support right now with the cost-of-living crisis.
Sentiment score: -0.29
Many people would love to be in the Minister's shoes and have the luxury to wait this out until next year until budget 2027 but they are not in that position. We have 320,000 families across this State who cannot pay their electricity bills. One in four households cannot pay their gas bills. Tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of other families are paying those bills but are really struggling, finding it difficult to make ends meet at the end of the week, working every hour God sends them and doing everything right, yet still they find it tough because groceries, insurance and rent have gone up. All the pressures of life are bearing down on them and they are looking at a Minister who has a surplus that is now twice what was projected just a couple of weeks ago but who tells them to hang in there, to tighten their belts, to hold tight and that the Government will come to them maybe in October or might have something for them in January. People need support right here, right now. The Minister needs to understand that there is serious pressure on families at this point in time and they are looking for a Government that will listen and respond to them. The way the Minister needs to respond is to bring forward measures that recognise the pressures families are under right now.
Sentiment score: -0.08
There the Minister goes again saying the winter could be very challenging. People are telling me that it is very challenging right now. How more challenging does it need to be when you cannot pay to keep the lights on in your home? That is the pressure that people are under. The Minister is saying that we need to keep the power dry until the winter and budget 2027 and I am telling him that there are large numbers of people who are really under pressure. They are under pressure because of the budget that the Government brought forward. The Government brought forward a budget of €9.4 billion last year and the Government left workers and families worse off. That is what the ESRI says. The ESRI is very clear on what the Government has done. They are worse off this year than they were last year. That is the Government's conscious decision. On top of that now, we have inflation. We have so much pressure bearing down on people. Can the Minister not understand that people's lives are really challenging now? What they are seeing is a Government that thought it would have a surplus of over €4 billion, now it is twice that amount and the Minister is still not willing to alleviate the pressures on those families right now.
Sentiment score: -0.06
138. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance the reason the motor insurance transparency code is voluntary and not subject to administrative sanctions procedure. [39714/26]
Sentiment score: 0.00
The Minister finally published his motor insurance transparency code, which was promised in the so-called insurance action plan. The action is completely powerless with no powers to sanction companies. Worse still, I understand it is voluntary. That was never mentioned in the original action plan. Why is the Government afraid to stand up to the insurance companies and hold them to account?
Sentiment score: -0.10
The cost of car insurance is going up and up. This is the fourth consecutive year of price rises and every motorist knows it. Irish people already pay almost double what the European motorist pays for car insurance. When one adds soaring fuel costs, too many people are being pushed to the brink in trying to keep a car on the road. We know from the Central Bank that the cost of car insurance is going up while costs for insurance companies are going down. The simple fact is that companies are pocketing the difference with the tacit support of Government. The answer of the Government is a voluntary code designed by the insurance industry. It is difficult to overstate how weak an approach this is. How is the public supposed to have any faith this will work when it is optional and completely toothless? We need a Government that is standing up to insurance companies and ensuring that the benefits of the reforms that have been passed in this House over the past number of years are not going into the pockets of the companies but, rather, are passed on to consumers in the form of reduced premiums.
Sentiment score: 0.00
Does the Minister of State not accept the average cost for motor insurance in this State is now €655? Does he accept that insurance companies are paying out less than half of that in claims? Does he accept that insurance companies are taking more in profits and inflated costs that they are paying out? They are all facts. Insurance companies are squeezing people dry to appease their shareholders. The Government wants to blame drivers. This Government is going along with that. The transparency code refers to risk mitigation and driver behaviour more than profit or inflated costs. I tabled proposed legislation four years ago in the House to set out how a Government could mandate insurance companies to show how they are actually passing on the benefits of these reforms to customers and not profiteering from those same reforms. Instead, we get a voluntary code with no audits or enforcement. Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael and the Independents that support them are blocking my Bill. The public deserves to have full transparency. They deserve not just transparency and accountability, but also reduced premiums, as was promised by these reforms. Unfortunately, if we do not have a Government that stands up to the industry, the industry will of course deepen its pockets with profits.
Sentiment score: 0.14
Not according to the Central Bank.
Sentiment score: 0.00
139. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance if he will reconsider his position and introduce a windfall tax on energy companies in order to fund support for workers and families with the rising cost of bills. [39715/26]
Sentiment score: 0.20
Will the Minister reconsider his position and introduce a windfall tax on energy companies in order to fund support for workers and families in the cost-of-living crisis? The Minister has stated he will not introduce a windfall energy tax on energy companies unless his hand is effectively forced by action at the European level. His performance during the last energy shock was abysmal. He allowed companies to enrich themselves. I urge him not to repeat the same mistakes, reconsider his position and prepare windfall tax measures in the State.
Sentiment score: -0.09
It is the same old playbook. We see the same playbook being used by the Government on the occupied territories Bill. When it does not want to do something, it reaches for the EU and uses it as an excuse. The EU has given member states the green light to act on this. The ball is in the Government's court, yet it is still finding excuses as to why it will not or cannot act. It is trying not to rewrite history. The Government opposed action at EU level during the last energy shock. Electricity companies were never hit with a windfall tax in the State. The TSC the Minister mentioned did not apply to electricity companies, but the European Commission has been crystal-clear this time that member states can act. The Minister can act. Does he accept that he is choosing not to act on a windfall tax on energy companies? Does the Minister accept he is choosing not to act in relation to windfall tax on energy companies now?
Sentiment score: 0.09
Who said that? Why are you making that up? Did I say that?
Sentiment score: 0.00
With respect, did I say that? Is the Minister just going to make up lies? Is he just going to do that?
Sentiment score: 0.02
I did not say it.
Sentiment score: 0.00
I did not say it.
Sentiment score: 0.00
I did not say that. I actually did not say that.
Sentiment score: 0.00
I know the Minister wanted me to say that and that is fine. I have no problem saying that but I did not say it. I did not work with the narrative of the Minister's script.
Sentiment score: -0.05
Let us be clear. The Minister has the power to do this now. He has the power to introduce a windfall tax on energy companies. He is refusing to do so. These companies are ripping off Irish customers left, right and centre. There is a decision the Minister has to take about which side he is on. He talks about the EU energy market but it does not stack up. The Irish energy market is not as integrated as that of other member states because we are an island nation.
Sentiment score: 0.08
There is a difference there in the first instance. That is a bit of a smokescreen in relation to an action. The reality is that the Minister does not want to do this. The European Commission has given him the power to do it and, of course, he should do it. Let us look at the last time we saw money collected. We know that €178 million is still sitting there. That was money that was supposed to directly support workers and families with the cost of electricity. I told the Minister earlier on. There are 320,000 families who cannot pay their electricity bill and the Minister has sat on a fund of €178 million for the past three years that is just sitting there. It is ridiculous.
Sentiment score: 0.01
144. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance the reason €7.7 billion in proceeds from the sale of AIB shares is sitting, uninvested, with the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund, ISIF. [39793/26]
Sentiment score: 0.10
It has come to light that the proceeds of selling off the State's assets in the form of the shareholding in AIB is still sitting with the ISIF and is losing value. How has this been allowed to happen under the watch of the Tánaiste and his predecessor as Minister for Finance? What action is he going to take to address it? This is a significant amount of money that is losing value at a time when the Tánaiste has been running around and telling people that they need to get a return on their own investments. We have millions of euro losing value under his watch.
Sentiment score: 0.05
I have always been of the view that the State should have retained ownership of AIB. It was a mistake to sell off the shares. Fine Gael has a different ideological point of view and wanted the bank back in private ownership and is entitled to hold that opinion. However, the ideological position has come at a real financial cost. I think we can accept that now with the benefit of hindsight. The public AIB share was sold off at one of the worst times. When the Government started selling shares, they cost €2.32. They are now worth over €10. That shareholding would today be worth €16 billion before we even talk about the massive dividends that we no longer get from the bank. What we have instead is less than half of that sum. Worse still is that the Government sold off the public shares at that time and just left large portions of the proceeds sitting there. It did not use the money to build the necessary infrastructure. The money is losing value. That is the issue. The Tánaiste talked about Exchequer returns, but it is circular. It is in the State and getting a very low return. There is no actual return. It is a net zero return. Does the Tánaiste accept that if we held those shares, they would be worth twice what we have now? That money should at least be getting some return as it sits in the ISIF account.
Sentiment score: 0.04
I appreciate what the Tánaiste has put on the record, that there was a reduction from €7.7 billion to a figure over €6 billion in the period of a year. However, it does not matter if the total is €7.7 billion or €6 billion. The money is sitting there and not making any return. It is in Exchequer notes, which means that the State is paying another organ of the State the 1%. It is making no return. It is financial mismanagement, on top of the fact that the Government sold the shares at one of the worst times. These shares would have been worth twice what we got for them if the Government held them today. We would be getting hundreds of millions of euro in dividends. This is serious financial mismanagement that the Comptroller and Auditor General should be exploring. We are not talking about hundreds of millions, or hundreds of thousands wasted on a bike shed or the €50 million wasted on the Irish Rail IT project. We are talking about billions of euro that has gone amiss as a result of selling the shares in AIB at the wrong time and then putting the proceeds from the sale of those shares in a fund that gets absolutely no return when inflation is running at 3.7%.
Sentiment score: -0.08
Who paid the interest? Was it the other organ of the State?
Sentiment score: 0.23
It is an Exchequer note, which means it is the other organ of the State. It makes a mockery of it.
Sentiment score: -0.16
164. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance the rationale for selling PTSB; and the safeguards that will be in place to protect jobs and the bank branch network. [39794/26]
Sentiment score: 0.20
This question is in relation to the sale of the State's shares in the banking sector. Will the Minister outline to the House the rationale he had for selling the shares? I acknowledge that parties are entitled to different ideological positions. Permanent TSB was never a strategic bank. I would rather have held the ownership of AIB within the State, but Permanent TSB has the potential to be a third force in banking in the State. Will the Minister outline the rationale and also the safeguards that are in place to protect jobs in branches? Will he also expand on the new ownership of the bank? How long is it involved in retail banking with branches? It is Question No. 164.
Sentiment score: 0.18
I did not think we would reach it.
Sentiment score: 0.03
I appreciate that.
Sentiment score: 0.40
The Minister mentioned the policy objective to return the banks to private ownership. I mentioned earlier that the State should have retained its position as a majority shareholder in AIB. It is not unique, as I am sure the Minister knows, for countries across Europe to be the majority shareholder or a significant shareholder in significant banks. It happens right across Europe, including in France and Germany. Many western European countries have that model, so the idea of the State having a share or a majority share in a bank is not something alien in terms of other European countries and in some cases competitors. The issue in this country is that we have a very small retail banking sector. I have always believed that despite some of the activities of AIB, the fact that the State was a shareholder forced it to be first movers in a lot of issues where it brought Bank of Ireland along with it. Will the Minister expand on whether he has received any guarantees from BAWAG during this sale process in relation to staffing and the branch network?
Sentiment score: 0.13
The Minister is aware that a number of taxation and levy measures flowed from the fact that the State rescued these banks at a time when they were literally bankrupt and bankrupted the State with their activities. The Government has already overturned some of those, for example, the salary caps within banks. There is a prohibition on bonuses or at least there is an excess charge that applies in terms of a 45% additional USC charge on any bonuses that are paid out above a certain limit. There are other restrictions as well, including the levy. Where does the Minister now stand in relation to those issues with the State divesting its shareholdings in these three banks that were bailed out?
Sentiment score: 0.20