Dear Sir, – It is disconcerting to realise that Tuesday’s budget overlooked those confronting the harshest humanitarian situations worldwide, as well as those struggling with food insecurity and conflict. Though the additional funds for climate mitigation are a positive step, it simply isn’t sufficient.
The lack of supplementary funding for humanitarian and development aid is tremendously disappointing; the budget missed an opportunity to provide help to those who are in the most challenging circumstances.
It is distressing to see the increasing disparity between the mounting needs and the support we are providing, especially during times where severe humanitarian crises are taking place in Sudan and Gaza, and parts of the Sahel and South Africa are struggling with food shortages, floods and conflicts.
Despite Ireland’s recent call at the UN General Assembly for member states to urgently act on the UN Sustainable Development Goals, we have yet to see them delivering on this commitment. We’re steadily drifting away from our goal to assign 0.7 per cent of our gross national income to official overseas development support.
Ireland has traditionally been seen as a champion for international aid, advocating for the most vulnerable, poorest, and those most neglected. However, on Tuesday, we fell short in upholding this reputation through tangible action.
With the resources at hand, Ireland could contribute more, and it is disheartening that the Government opted out of investing heavily in overseas development aid – a measure supported by 76 per cent of Irish people.
Yours sincerely,
JANE-ANN McKENNA,
CEO,
Dóchas, the Irish Association of Non-Governmental Development Organisations,
Dublin 8.
Dear Sir, – My economics lecturer always maintained that budgets should be stringent yet achievable.
The only real trial with Budget 2025 is ensuring it’s ratified before the November elections.
Yours sincerely,
AIDAN RODDY,
Cabinteely,
Dublin 18.
Dear Sir, – The author of a letter published on October 3rd drew attention to a significant subject regarding the unequal distribution of income tax, with less than 10 per cent of the population bearing the majority of the tax burden. However, this letter contained a frequent misinterpretation by conflating wealth with income.
Take for example an individual with a high salary of €200,000, who would see approximately half of this deducted at source. Even if they were able to obtain a mortgage to buy the least expensive house featured in the property supplement for a whopping €850,000, they might spend half of their net income on repayments. This doesn’t equate to wealth.
Moreover, various individuals, including Mr. Alan Shatter, are lobbying fiercely for the rights of the wealthier class. Their campaigns advocate for inter-generational transfer of wealth tax-free, effectively enabling certain people to lead luxurious lives in one of the most developed nations globally without offering a financial contribution. They live lavish lifestyles, subsidised by individuals burdened with heavy taxes that limit their ability to even afford a house.
Dear Sir – Jack Chambers, the Minister for Finance, has recently increased the tax-free bands and amounts which disposers can pass on. However, his reforms have failed to address the disparity between disposers with children and those without.
Disposers with children can transfer their wealth, known as Group A assets, to each child tax-free up to €400,000, whilst those without kids are denied the same privilege. This discrimination should be rectified; data from Probate Office and the CSO should be employed to determine the yearly average cost.
A fairly small number of single individuals die each year leaving behind assets worth more than €400,000. This is based on demographic data, which indicates a higher percentage of married couples compared to singles.
Perhaps this issue should be addressed to the Minister for Equality or the Minister for Justice.
Yours Sincerely,
BRIAN O’BRIEN,
Kinsale, Co Cork.
And,
AINE O’DONOGHUE,
Dublin 6.
Dear Sir, – The initial judgements put forth by the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council (Ifac) on the Budget 2025 (News, October 2nd) concerning the Government’s strategic choices to inject billions of Euros into the economy via support and tax cuts are fundamentally flawed.
Comments made by Ifac drawing parallels with frivolous budgets from volatile economic periods such as the pre-Celtic Tiger era prove to be superficial. Considering, in 2006, as per the response provided in the Oireachtas by then-Finance Minister Brian Cowen to then-Finance Opposition Spokesperson Richard Bruton, the Consumer Price Index (CPI) spiked to 3.8%, a stark contrast to the stable target level of 2%.
That period was exceedingly fuelled by economic oversupply due to easily accessible and unsustainable credit, such as the provision of 100 per cent mortgages.
Contrastingly, as reported by the Central Statistic Office, this year’s CPI in August mark was a lesser 1.7%, compared to last year’s 2.2% in August.
It is universally accepted in any functioning economy that aggregate demand is essential for full employment. A more restrictive budget, such as one avoiding the income tax reliefs included in the current budget, would have likely jeopardised consumer demand and confidence within the Irish economy, possibly putting jobs at risk.
The government has reacted to requests to make employment more rewarding; childcare more affordable; and rightly investing further in infrastructure due to the influx of Apple revenues. This investment is timely in combating growing strains on capacity that such infrastructure will cater to, not only currently, but also in the years to come. Yours faithfully,
Councillor JOHN KENNEDY,
(Fine Gael),
Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council Offices,
Dún Laoghaire,
Co Dublin.
Dear Editor,
I find myself quite perturbed after observing the comments post-budget announcement. It appears that there’s a profound distress prevalent within the Irish community. In the midst of an exceptionally profitable allocation, it’s disappointing that no one appears content with what they have received. This is despite the considerable one-time gains from bank equity recoveries, the judgment on Apple, and worryingly, a heavy dependence on inconsistent taxes from international corporations.
There’s a conspicuous increase in public spending without any significant accountability, transparency, or responsibility, which is infamously hard to retract. It seems the political system is defective. We are without a sustainable strategic approach to tackle the numerous challenges the nation is facing. Instead, we witness politics of auction. Regards,
VERNON RUSHE,
Rathgar,
Dublin 6.
Correspondent,
I propose that Jack Chambers declares the next year’s funds allocation tomorrow. This could be a method to outmaneuver those who leak information. Truly yours,
DAVID CURRAN,
Knocknacarra,
Galway.