Dublin led 2007 disposable income league by almost 11%

AT the height of the boom disposal income for Dubliners was almost 11% higher than the rest of the country – and 33% higher than the lowest county average.

Figures from the Central Statistics Office show that the gap in disposable income between Dublin and the rest of the country fell during the first decade of the 21st century from 16.6% in 2000 to 10.8% in 2007.

However, by 2007, when earnings were at their highest, workers in the capital still had an average of €24,038 in disposable income. That compared to just €18,070 in Donegal, €19,003 in Kerry and €19,141 in Offaly.

The size of the figure in Dublin brought the state average up to €21,6094 and meant that only three other counties were above the nationwide average – Kildare (€22,636), Limerick (€21,966) and Meath (€21,871).

Apart from Donegal, Kerry and Offaly, there were four other counties where the average disposable income fell below €20,000 – Leitrim (€19,889), Longford (€19,401), Mayo (19,417) and Roscommon (€19,619).

In terms of total income in 2007, again Dublin far outstripped much of the rest of the country. At that point the average total income in the capital was €31,068. That compared to just €21,399 in Donegal. Fourteen counties were below €25,000.

The CSO also looked at “gross value added” in each region – the difference between the value of goods and services produced and the cost of raw materials and other inputs which are used up in production.

Those figures show how much an area contributes to the economy as it is an indicator of output and is not a measure of the income or wealth of the residents of that region. Under those figures, Dublin was 22.8% above the state average in 2007, while areas in the midlands were 34.2% below the average.

Irish Rural Link, which campaigns for sustainable rural communities, said the figures showed a “two-tier” Ireland with significant differences in income between urban and more rural counties and with larger gaps likely in future.

“These figures show that spending on rural infrastructure and local services cannot be cut, and highlight the need for investment in infrastructure and training,” said Link chairman Seamus Boland. “Developing the full potential of each region to contribute to the economic performance of the state as a whole is more important in the current circumstances than ever before. Commitments to achieving more balanced regional development must be kept and we need some fresh thinking on developing more dynamic regional employment markets.”