Cuts and taxes in Budget 2014
Sir, – I am a lone parent of an eight-year-old daughter. I was once a designer. The Budget basically said to me: Stay at home and live off social welfare as we don’t care about you and your daughter’s future.
Single parents who, due to our system, are better off staying on social welfare and in turn don’t have any chance of getting out and working and contributing to the public purse, are painted in a very ugly light because of the system. Not only that, what kind of example are single parents setting for their children?
Have they no right to go out and work and make something of themselves and instil that in their children? According to the Government, they don’t.
And now it brings in an outrageous change in payments to single parents who have joint custody. Is it trying to put more pressure on already pressured families? It looks like it. There is no thought for the children in this Budget.
Disgusting behaviour! – Yours, etc,
Sir, – Given recent Government concern about the (alleged) annual cost of running the Seanad, I expected to see action in the Budget. Surely the ideal time to cut the Senators’ tax free “turning up” money (officially their travel and accommodation allowance)?
But no. In its wisdom, the Government decides to save by abolishing the telephone allowance paid to the elderly.
Well I suppose it thought that if the Senators lost their “turning up money” then logically TDs would have to lose theirs.
It’s a lot to lose. For example TDs in Band I (they live 25km to 59km from the Dáil) get €25,295 pa tax free to cover their “travel’ expenses to work and within their constituency on top of their €87,258 salary. – Yours, etc,
A chara, – Anthony Leavy (October 17th) attempts to make the tenuous connection between the public’s recent decision to retain the Seanad and this week’s Budget, which took money from pensioners and raised the cost of medicine for the sick. That is a disingenuous attempt to defend the indefensible.
The generally accepted saving from scrapping the Seanad would have been far less than the €20 million that was spuriously put forward by the Government in its campaign, probably around €6 million, and none of it would have been realised until 2016. To suggest it is hypocritical for the public to complain about the unfairness inherent in the Budget because we have voted to retain the Seanad is ludicrous.
The decisions to raise prescription charges, remove the telephone allowance from pensioners and slash jobseekers’ allowance for the young cannot be blamed on the Celtic tiger or the democratic decision to retain the Seanad. They are decisions being taken by a Government that is ideologically drawn towards business – as demonstrated by the raft of “pro-business” tax breaks that accompanied the cuts and charges for the old and sick – and is less concerned with governing for the citizens. – Is mise,