2011

"Government failure to protect the vulnerable can and must be reversed" - C+V Pillar of Social Partnership

Government has failed to protect the vulnerable according to the 17 organisations in the Community and Voluntary Pillar of social partnership. In its five-point integrated recovery strategy which forms part of its submission for Budget 2011 (launched September 7, 2010) the Pillar argues that this failure must and can be reversed in Budget 2011. The key elements in the Pillar's strategy involve:

  • Increasing the tax take while keeping Ireland a low tax country (through broadening and deepening the tax base and addressing tax-breaks as recommended by the Commission on Taxation).
  • Securing better value for money in the delivery of our public services.
  • Reforming the public sector (by implementing the recommendations contained in the report of the OECD).
  • Targeted expenditure cuts where required but ensure that vulnerable people are protected. A good starting point would be the elimination of waste identified in the Comptroller and Auditor General’s reports.
  • Focusing expenditure on the common good to provide required infrastructure and public services.

The Community and Voluntary Pillar's full document is available here.

Alternative, costed Budget shows how Government could reduce borrowing by €3bn while protecting the vulnerable in Budget 2011

Details of Social Justice Ireland's fully-costed alternative Budget, published October 4, 2010, can be accessed here.

Budget Submissions and proposals from various organisations and groups - 2011

Details of Pre-Budget submissions and proposals from 27 organisations are available here. 

The organisations include Social Justice Ireland, Community and Voluntary Pillar of Social Partnership, the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, IBEC, the Environmental Pillar of Social Partnership, the Carers' Association, Disbility Federation of Ireland, National Women's Council of Ireland, the Irish National Organisation  of the Unemployed, Sinn Fein, the Construction Industry Federation, the Irish Taxation Institute, ISME, TASC, the Alzheimer's Association of Ireland, Focus Ireland, Pavee Point, Society of Chartered Surveyors, Make Room, Chartered Accoiuntants, Centre for Independent Living, Threshold, Care Alliance Ireland, Amnesty International, ISME and Nursing Homes Ireland.  More will be added as they become available.
Social Justice Ireland
Community and Voluntary Pillar of Social Partners
ICTU
IBEC
Environmental Pillar of Social Partnership
Carers Association
Disability Federation Ireland
Irish Rural Link
National Women’s Council of Ireland
Irish National Organisation of the Unemployed
Sinn Fein
Construction Industry Federation
Irish Taxation Institute
ISME
TASC
Alzheimer Society of Ireland
Focus Ireland
Pavee Point
Society of Chartered Surveyors
Make Room
Chartered Accoiuntants
Centre for Independent Living
Threshold

Care Alliance Ireland
Amnesty International
Irish Small and Medium Enterprises
Nursing Homes Ireland
 

 

Budget adjustment must not be achieved by cuts alone

Social Justice Ireland has challenged the Minister for Finance, Brian Lenihan, to reject the proposal being attributed to him and his Department in recent days that all adjustments in Budget 2011 are to be met by cutting expenditure for services and infrastructure. Such an approach would condemn Ireland to a long period in recession with high unemployment and poor service provision according to this organisation which is a Social Partner in the Community and Voluntary Pillar of Social Partnership.
Social Justice Ireland fears that we are seeing a repetition of what happened last year. During 2009 the Government’s original publicly-stated commitment was to make adjustments in the Budget through a combination of tax increases and cuts in expenditure. Government went on in Budget 2010 to make all its €4bn adjustments through cuts alone. Continuing with such an approach in the coming year would be bad for the economy and bad for social services that are required in areas such as education, care of the elderly and disability services.
Social Justice Ireland believes that:  

  • Cuts in public expenditure are important but only part of the solution.
  • As Ireland’s total tax-take is one of the lowest in the EU then Ireland’s total tax-take should be raised in a fair and equitable manner while keeping Ireland a low-tax economy (i.e. below 35% of GDP which is the cut-off level provided by Eurostat for a low-tax economy).
  • Public sector reform and getting value for money remain critically important to resolving Ireland’s current series of crises.
  • The exposure of the tax-payer to the losses incurred by banks and the consequent expenditure of tax-payers’ money on rescuing these institutions should be minimised.

Social Justice Ireland's analysis of Ireland's taxation situation (level, base. proposals for change) can be accessed here.
Social Justice Ireland's analysis of how Ireland came to be in its present mess and how it should be addressed can be accessed here.
 

Government's approach to Budget will damage the sick, the poor and the vulnerable

Social Justice Ireland has issued the following statement on the Government’s approach to the forthcoming Budget and the period to 2014.

  1. The Government’s current approach to Budget 2011 will seriously damage sick, poor and vulnerable people. While Government has stated it will support these groups, its refusal to ‘put everything up on the table’ for consideration means that Ireland’s weakest groups will take the major part of the ‘hit’ for the reckless actions of greedy bankers, incompetent regulators and an inept government.
  1. While Government has said that everything must be on the table when it considers how to reduce its borrowing to 3% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by 2014 it immediately goes on to insist that: 

·         Senior bond-holders cannot be asked to bear any part of the adjustment;
·         The corporation tax rate cannot be increased;
·         The Croke Park agreement must be honoured in full.
·         A greater part of the adjustments will come through expenditure cuts rather than through tax increases.
 

  1. This approach is hypocritical and deeply unjust. Either everything is on the table or it is not.
  1. By taking so many things off the table Government has created a situation where most of the adjustments will be made at the expense of the poor, the sick and the vulnerable. We have seen this articulated clearly recently when Minister for Health, Mary Harney TD, stated that up to €1bn in cuts would have to come from 30% of the health budget (the remaining 70% is pay which is protected by the Croke Park agreement). In practice this means that programmes focused on helping those who are sick, poor or vulnerable will take all the ‘hit’. This is patently unjust.
  1. It is clear that Government has decided that those who are rich and/or strong will not be asked to make sacrifices while those who are weak and poor will bear the brunt of the Government’s budget adjustments. This can be seen clearly when Government ministers continue to insist that they must:

·         Reduce welfare rates (which will hit the weakest and poorest as well as increasing poverty);
·         Bring the working poor into the tax net which will deepen their poverty (more than a third of all households at risk of poverty are headed by a person WITH a job);
·         Reducing the funding for programmes providing services to people who are ill, old or have a disability (i.e. Ireland’s most vulnerable people).
 

  1. Social Justice Ireland fully acknowledges the gravity of the present situation which has been caused by a variety of groups including bankers, regulators and government itself. Very difficult decisions must be made and made quickly if the present decline is to be reversed. It is in the interest of all Irish people that the correct decisions be made now.  
  1. However, those decisions must be fair and just. They must also be seen to be fair and just. What Government is proposing to do is deeply unfair and unjust. It is totally unacceptable that Government targets the sick, the poor and the vulnerable to rescue Ireland while some of those who are among Ireland’s richest and/or most powerful groups and who contributed in a major way to the current crisis are dispensed from making any contribution to rectifying the situation.
  1. Social Justice Ireland believes a fairer future is possible. We urge Government to act fairly and justly in the coming weeks and months as it designs a pathway out of the present difficult situation. Such a pathway must not target the sick, the poor and the vulnerable. A fairer future can be shaped and reached without asking the weakest and poorest in society to bear the brunt of the adjustments required

Social Justice Ireland has published a fully-costed Budget (published October 4, 2010) which was based on the Government’s earlier parameters of seeking a reduction of €3bn in borrowing in 2011. Full details are available here.
 

Income Changes – a 25-year Assessment: Welfare rates should NOT have been reduced

Was it fair to cut welfare rates in Budget 2011?  Did the increases in social welfare rates in the mid-2000s justify a reduction in rates in Budget 2011?  The Minister for Finance and the Government claimed the answer to both of these questions was yes. We disagree and suggest the evidence does not support the Government's claims.

Income changes: A 25-year assessment

Budget 2011 delivered a series of cuts to the take home pay of Ministers, workers and social welfare recipients. In his Budget speech, the Minister for Finance announced a reduction in the basic social welfare payment, jobseekers benefit, and signalled that further reductions should follow. Social Justice Ireland rejects the suggestion that these basic welfare rates are too high and we further question the short-sighted justification for these reductions.

Our analysis may be downloaded in pdf format here.
Social Justice Ireland has calculated the income gains over the past quarter of a century for a range of people. Below we provide the details after tax and social insurance have been deducted. 
 
The following should be noted about the calculations:
·         Taxation is calculated on a single person basis under normal rules as this yields the lowest net pay. It could be calculated differently which would result in the nett weekly pay increase being higher for those in paid employment included in the table.
·         1086 values have been converted from pounds to euros.
·         The pay for a TD is calculated on the 2011 rate for a TD with 10 years service or more. When the next Dail is elected there will be no increments available to TDs and all will earn the same basic pay of €92,672 a year.
·         To allow like for like comparison, the figures do not take not account pension contributions or deductions as these are neither available nor comparable across sectors. In this context it should be noted that those at the higher income range have a much greater gain for their pension contributions compared to the others listed in the table.
 
As the table above (post Budget 2011 reductions), in the past quarter century the take-homepay of TDs rose by €902 a week while unemployment benefit rates for a single person only rose by €135 in the same period. Government ministers’ take-home pay rose by more than €1,030 a week in the same period. Similarly, the take-home pay of clerical officers in the public sector rose by €406.80 a week; the take-home pay of a person on the average industrial wage rose by €342.66 a week; and the contributory old age pension for a single person rose by €162.35 a week.
These are dramatic numbers in the context of this year’s Budget and Social Welfare Act. Ministers whose take-home pay has risen by more than eight times the rise in social welfare rates proposed that social welfare rates be reduced. Likewise, a majority of TDs whose take-home pay rose by seven times the rise in social welfare rates voted to reduce welfare rates.
Other choices existed that would have enabled Government NOT to cut social welfare rates. These choices should have been taken.  Social Justice Ireland has outlined these choices in its Policy Briefing on Budget Choices published in advance of the Budget and in its Analysis and Critique of Budget 2011. Both are available on this website together with a wide range of related material addressing these issues.

 

2000-07: Welfare Boom or Catching up?
A worrying feature of some commentary over the past few months has been a claim that there was a boom in welfare payments since 2000. This claim has also been repeated by some Government Ministers. These assessments tend to miss one key point—that welfare rates did increase since 2000, but that that increase followed a period, as the Celtic Tiger began to appear, where the living standards of people in Irish society had increase rapidly while welfare payments had barely changed. Table 10.1 below provides some telling evidence to reflect this. In 1994 the first Irish income distribution survey from the ESRI commenced and recorded poverty rates of 5.3% for those on old age pensions, 5.5% for those on widowed pensions and 10% for those who were ill or disabled. Seven years later these poverty rates had rocketed reflecting the fact that these groups were left behind as the economy boomed. Subsequently welfare payments did increase, but this was merely catching up so that recipients could enjoy basic living standards.
 

 

 

 

Leading independent analysis find’s UK Budget deeply unfair

Britain's leading analysts of the UK Budget, the Institute for Fiscal Studies, has concluded that the measures contained in the recent UK Budget  would hit the poor harder than the rich. They reject the Government’s claim that the budget was “tough but fair”. This was before the British Chancellor admitted that he was looking for extra cuts in the social welfare budget. There are lessons here for the Irish Government as it prepares its Budget for 2011. More than rhetoric is required to deliver a fair and progressive Budget.

UK Budget June 22, 2010 - key features and full details

 

More than €15bn has already been taken out by Government before the latest adjustments begin for Budget 2011

Since it started making adjustments to its budget in July 2008 to address its economic and fiscal problems the Irish government has made adjustments of €15.4bn.  This is important to note as it illustrates the danger of taking a further €15bn out of the economy in four years.  The details are as follows (all numbers list full-year impact):
July 2008:    €1bn
October 2008 (Budget 2009):   2bn
February 2009 (expenditure adjustments):    €3.1bn
April 2009 (supplementary Budget):   €5.3bn
December 2009 (Budget 2010):   €4bn

The relevant table from Budget 2010 can be accessed here.
Government's approach of reducing Ireland's borrowing requirement to 3% of GDP by 2014 will seriously damage the economy and seriously damage Ireland's social cohesion.  The situation will be worsened further by Government's decision to achieve this by reducing expenditure by more than it increases taxation.  Social Justice Ireland urges Government to insist the deadline is extended to 2016 and to ensure that those who are poor or vulnerable are protected. This can be done. For details you can check Social Justice Ireland's fully costed budget for 2011 which was published on October 4, 2010.

New "universal social contribution" must not hit the poor

A proposal by the Minister for Finance, Brian Lenihan TD, to introduce a "new universal social contrtibution to be paid at a low rate on a wide base" provides major challenges to policy designers to ensure it is not a change that will benefit the better off while penalising those on low pay or on social welfare. The Minister has stated that the new social contribution will replace employee PRSI, the Health Levy and the Income Levy. Such a contribution would be more streamlined and has the potential to be fairer. However, it seems to be developed principally to increase the total tax-take and to target the "nearly half of all income earners" who will pay no income tax in 2010. So there is a real danger that the net outcome of this new payment would be some (or, perhaps, no) gains in take-home income for high earners but substantial reductions in the take-home income of medium to low earners.

The Minister for Finance outlined his proposals in a presentation to the Irish Taxation Institute. His presentation can be accessed here   In this presentation the Minister stated there would be adjustments of €3bn in Budget 2011. This would be made up of

  • €1bn adjustment in capital spending already provided for, and
  • €2bn adjustment through reducing the cost of public services and reform of how we tax income.

It is under this latter item that the Minister ouitlined his proposal for a universal social contribution.

Social Justice Ireland supports Act Now on 2010 campaign

Sociakl Justice Ireland supports Act Now on 2010 campaign

The 'Poor Can't Pay' campaign launches 'Time to Make a Commitment' initiative

The 'Poor Can't Pay' campaign launches 'Time to Make a Commitment' initiative

UK Budget June 22, 2010 - key features and full details

All details of the UK Budget announced on June 22, 2010 are available here

Key features of the UK budget
On the economy:
·       Growth is forecast to be 1.2% this year taking into account the measures announced in this Budget. It is forecast to be 2.3% next year, 2.8% in 2012, 2.9% in 2013 and 2.7% in both 2014 and 2015.
·       Debt will be falling and structural current deficit is to be balanced by 2014.
·       Consumer price inflation (CPI) is expected to reach 2.7% by the end of the year.
·       Unemployment rate forecast to peak at 8.1% this year and then fall for each of the next four years to reach 6.1% in 2015.
·       77% of total adjustments to be achieved through spending cuts and 23% through tax increases.
·       Public sector net borrowing will be £149bn this year, £116bn next year, £89bn in 2102-13, £60bn in 2013-14, £37bn in 2014-15, falling to £20bn in 2015-16.
·       Public sector net debt as share of GDP will be 62% this year and will peak at 70% in 2013-14. It will then begin to fall reaching 67% in 2015-16.
·       Additional current expenditure reductions of £30bn a year by 2014-15.
·       No further reductions in capital spending totals.
On the public sector:
·       Two year public sector pay freeze on staff earning more than £21,000.
·       People earning less than £21,000 will each receive a flat pay rise worth £250 in each of the two years.
·       Operational allowance for troops in Afghanistan doubled to £4,800.
·       Will Hutton is to draw up plans for fairer pay across the public sector, without increasing the overall pay bill, so that those at the top of organisations are paid no more than 20 times the salaries of those at the bottom.
·       An independent commission will review public sector pensions. There will also be consultation on scrapping the default retirement age.
·       Rise in the state pension age to 66 will be accelerated.
·       Government will seek private capital injection into the Royal Mail Group.
On social welfare:
·       Benefits, tax credits and public service pensions will increase in line with consumer prices rather than the retail price index.
·       Child benefit is to be frozen for the next three years.
·       Caps on housing benefit to be introduced - from £280 a week for a one-bedroom property to £400 a week for a four-bedroom or larger. Together with other measures this will reduce costs of housing benefit by £1.8bn a year by the end of the parliament.
·       Sure start maternity grant will go to the first child only.
·       Eligibility for child tax credits to be reduced for families with a household income of more than £40,000 from April next year
·       The baby element of child tax credit will be abolished from April next year
·       Child element of the child tax credit to increase by £150 above indexation next year.
On pensions:
·       From April next year the basic state pension will be re-linked with earnings.
·       Basic state pension will increase every year by highest of earnings, inflation or 2.5%.
On taxation:
·       Corporation tax, currently 28%, to fall by 1p in the pound a year for four consecutive years until it reaches 24%.
·       Small companies tax to fall to 20%.
·       New firms outside south-east/east to be let off employers national insurance controbutons, up to £5,000, for each of first 10 employees recruited.
·       Vat to increase to 20% on 4 January next year. Will generate over £13bn a year of extra revenues.
·       Government to work with local authorities to freeze council tax for one year from April next year.
·       Capital gains tax,  currently  18%, to increase for higher earners to 28% from midnight. Low and middle-income savers will continue to pay 18%
·       Personal income tax allowance to be raised by £1,000 from April to £7,475. Will take 880,000 people out of tax altogether.
·       Higher rate income tax threshold frozen until 2013.
·      The standard rate of insurance premiium tax to rise from 5% to 6% and the higher rate to increase from 17.5% to 20%.
·      50p levy a  month on phones to pay for the rollout of superfast broadband is scrapped. 
·      Planned tax relief for video industry to be scrapped.
On banks and savings:
·       Bank levy to be introduced in January next year to apply to the balance sheets of UK banks and building societies, and to the UK operations of banks from abroad. Expected to raise over £2bn of annual revenues.
On duties applied to drinks, cigarettes and fuel:
·       No increase in duties.
·       Reversal of government decision to increase duties on cider by 10% above inflation confirmed.
On business:
·       Regional Growth Fund to provide finance for regional capital projects over the next two years.
·       The 10% Capital gains tax rate for entrepreneurs, which currently applies to the first £2m of qualifying gains made over a lifetime, will be extended to the first £5m of lifetime gains.
·       Capital allowances for the majority of plant and machinery assets to fall from 20% to 18%, while the allowance for longer-lived assets will fall from 10% to 8% from April 2012.
·       Annual Investment Allowance to fall to £25,000 a year.
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Government's Jobs Initiative - Full Text

The Irish Government published a Jobs Initiative on May 10, 2011.  This initiative honoured a commitment contained in the Programme for Government.

The full text of the Government's Jobs Initiative document may be accecssed here.

Jobs Initiative far too small to make any impact of substance on Ireland’s record level of long-term unemployment

Social Justice Ireland believes the Government’s ‘Jobs Initiative’ is far too small to make any impact of substance on Ireland’s record level of long-term unemployment. The proposals contained within the Jobs Initiative are welcome as far as they go but there will be no major reduction in the numbers long-term unemployed for the foreseeable future without far more radical action being taken aimed directly at reducing the numbers long-term unemployed.

Social Justice Ireland notes that the total value of new spending and cuts in VAT, PRSI and air travel tax is €470m in 2011. However, only €29m of this is allocated to labour activation measures. This means that long-term unemployed people will receive little benefit from this Initiative. Government must move swiftly to address the situation where for the first time in Ireland’s history, over half of those unemployed are in fact long-term unemployed. More radical initiatives are urgently required.
Initiatives focused on improving job creation and protecting jobs that already exist are very welcome and necessary but they should not be allowed create an illusion that Ireland’s unemployment crisis will be resolved in the period immediately ahead. The transition from near full employment to high unemployment has been a significant and shameful story in the current recession.  Action is urgently required to change this situation. The Jobs Initiative is a first step but a very long road stretches out ahead.
Social Justice Ireland has presented proposals to Government which would create 100,000 part-time jobs for long-term unemployed people over a three-year period. This programme was successfully piloted in six different parts of the country during Ireland’s last period of major unemployment (1994-98). It was mainstreamed in 1997 by Government. The Minister responsible for that mainstreaming was Mr Richard Bruton and his Minister of State was Pat Rabbitte TD.
The proposed Part-Time Job Opportunities programme:

  • Would create 100,000 part-time jobs for unemployed people;
  • Paid at the going hourly rate for the job;
  • Participants working the number of hours required to earn the equivalent of their social welfare payment and a small top-up;
  • Up to a maximum of 19.5 hours a week.
  • Access would be on a voluntary basis only;
  • Jobs would be created in the public sector and the community and voluntary sector;
  • Participants would be remunerated principally through the reallocation of social welfare payments.
  • Working on these jobs participants would be allowed to take up other paid employment in their spare time without incurring loss of benefits and would be liable to tax in the normal way if their income was sufficient to bring them into the tax net.

We strongly urge Government to take initiatives along the lines of this proposal which would have the scale to make a major difference to the lives of one of Ireland’s most vulnerable groups i.e. the long-term unemployed.
 
 

Unjust choices rob the poor, protect gamblers, damage the economy

Budget 2011 is unjust, unfair and unacceptable. The choices made will rob the poor to protect people and institutions who caused many of Ireland’s problems through their reckless gambling with banks. It will seriously damage Ireland’s economy, social services and infrastructure.
Poor people will be the big losers as a result of the decisions made by Government in this Budget. The working poor, low income families with children and people on social welfare will see their poverty deepen or will be pushed into poverty. (p.3)
Full text of Social Justice Ireland's Analysis and Critique of Budget 2011 is available here.
People depending on public services will be seriously disadvantaged as these services decline and the cost of accessing them will put them beyond the reach of many. (p.19)
On the other hand, the rich and powerful, including senior bond holders and the corporate sector, will be the main beneficiaries in that they are not required either to pay for their misdeeds or to make a contribution towards Ireland’s rescue. 
The Minister for Finance claimed that Ireland is continuing “to work off the excesses of the boom”. While accusations of excess could be levelled at some of the people who created the mess Ireland now finds itself in, it cannot be truthfully applied to Ireland’s poor people.
Likewise, it is misleading for the Minister to point to the increases in welfare rates in recent years to justify their reduction in Budget 2011.
An analysis of the past quarter century shows that the better off have benefitted far more than the working poor or those depending on welfare payments. For example the net, take-home, income of a Government Minister in 2011 (after the current budget changes are implemented) will be €1,034 a WEEK higher than it was in 1986. On the other hand the take-home income of a person in receipt of job-seekers benefit will have risen by only €136. This cannot justify a decrease in social welfare rates. We provide a range of similar comparisons on page 10.
 
Bad for the economy
Budget 2011 takes huge risks with the Irish economy by implementing adjustments of €6bn. Government has provided no serious assessment of the appropriateness of such an adjustment which is likely to depress Ireland’s growth rate to a level lower than projected by Government. The scale of the adjustment is too severe. It will have a negative impact on Ireland’s potential to recover. (p.6)
 
Failing on taxation
Government failed to act on the scale required to increase Ireland’s total tax-take by broadening the tax base and eliminating tax breaks that benefit the better off for the most part. We welcome the moves towards eliminating tax breaks and reform of the tax system. However, failure to deal with the reality of Ireland’s very low total tax-take (all taxes + social insurance + local charges) means too much of the Government’s fiscal adjustment will come from cuts. (p.7)
 
Failing Ireland’s poorest
Social welfare recipients and the working poor will see themselves pushed deeper into the degradation of poverty to pay for the actions of others, actions in which they had no hand, act or part.
In Budget 2011 their payments were reduced by €8 a week for a single person, €13.30 a week for a couple. This means a single person is now expected to live on €188.00 a week (€312.80 for a couple). It will be almost impossible to survive in Ireland in 2011 on that income let alone life with dignity. Ireland’s poorest have been condemned to penury by this Government’s choices. (pp.8+9)
 
Failing on unemployment
The Government is projecting a small reduction in unemployment but also expecting a small fall in employment. This means that the fall in unemployment is being driven by emigration. The latest ESRI study projects 60,000 people to emigrate this year.
 
Failing the working poor
The situation of the working poor has been seriously worsened by choices Government made in this Budget To address this issue tax credits should be refundable i.e. the low-paid could benefit from their full value. Government chose to make their situation worse by bringing the working poor into the tax net. This, combined with the impact of the Universal Social Charge and the reduction in the minimum wage condemn the working poor to living in poverty for years to come. Government sought to justify this by saying the low-paid should contribute to Ireland’s recovery. At the same time Government failed to make the same demand of senior bond holders, the corporate sector or many companies and individuals who benefit from huge tax breaks.
 
Negative impact on services
The reduced funding for education, healthcare and the community and voluntary sector will mean that services will be reduced or will have to be paid for across a wide range of activities. As well as cuts in health services there will be negative impacts on a wide range of services ranging from rural transport to adult literacy, from meals on wheels to school transport. (p.7)
 
There are alternatives
This Budget is based on the failed assumptions of the past decade and more. It is based on a development model that:
· sees the future being reached through having one of the lowest total tax-takes in the EU;
· gives priority to the economy over all else;
· believes that cuts in public expenditure are the key.
· believes no major bank must be allowed to collapse no matter what the cost may be. 
Experience shows this doesn’t work. But there are alternatives to this failed approach. Four core values that should underpin a guiding vision for Ireland are: human dignity, sustainability, equality/human rights and the common good. Guided by these values Ireland needs new policy priorities aimed at paying our way, securing economic and social development, securing the necessary economic and social infrastructure, tackling unemployment, reducing poverty, reforming the public sector and getting value for money.
A good starting point would be the development of a multi-year plan that would be guided by this approach. A key component of any viable plan must be the commitment to move Ireland’s total tax-take to 34.9% of GDP. The details are spelt out on pages 21+24.
 
Conclusion
The Minister’s claim that Budget 2011 was progressive and had distributed the burden of adjustment fairly is patently not true. While high earners did take some of the ‘hit’, it was the working poor, families, children and people depending on welfare who have been hardest ‘hit’. Many will be driven into poverty as a result of this Government’s choices. Others will be in much deeper poverty in 2011. This Budget was not progressive. In fact it was deeply unjust and unfair.