Mick Clifford: Some sections of society left shortchanged by 'Big Mac budget'

This was a budget more focused on business, and the need to ensure that the economy is equipped for any approaching storm rather than alleviating the worst ravages of poverty, writes Mick Clifford

John Power, Elmarie Crowley, and Esther Cotter watch Pascal Donohoe deliver the budget statement on TV at the Homer Bar, Shandon Street, Cork. Picture: Dan Linehan

The army is getting a new uniform, according to Jack Chambers. It’s not clear whether the boys and girls of the Defence Forces are to be togged out in hairshirts, but it might be appropriate considering the budget.

There was much wailing in the aftermath of the speeches delivered by Pascal Donohoe and Jack Chambers.

Some of it was entirely warranted. There are cohorts of the population who are struggling, some badly.

There were measures that could have been taken that might relieve stress and provide basic improvements to quality of life.

There are problems with housing and renting beyond the scope of this budget, but in light of multiple government failures, a few hopeful gestures wouldn’t have gone astray.

There was none of that.

This was, instead, a post-election ‘steady-as-you-go’ budget. 

There was little to give away, and much inferring that we need to keep an eye on gathering clouds and the distant rumble of thunder.

“Batten down the hatches” appears to have been the message from the ministers of finance and public expenditure, respectively.

Over on the opposition benches, the whole country was one step away from descending into some kind of hell where citizens are eating their young after digesting the household furniture. 

Pearse Doherty, in what was generally a solid speech, appeared at one stage to be on the point of self-combustion with high indignation.

“I am shocked by what’s in this budget," he said.

This budget reeks of a catalogue of hand-outs for those at the top.

"If you’re one of hundreds of thousands of ordinary households impacted by the housing crisis…then this budget screws you over.”

Certainly, some sections of society were left shortchanged, and areas from childcare right through to housing and cost-of-living measures were not well served by the day’s work. The opposition had plenty to complain about.

Labour’s Ged Nash had a cut at housing policy and the relevant minister.

“We have a housing minister who is the very definition of an empty suit,” he said. “Most people couldn’t pick him out of a line-up.”

In the round, two outstanding features summed it up.

A hairshirt budget

In the first instance, it had to be something approaching a hairshirt budget. The spending increases of recent years simply couldn’t go on.

First, there was covid and the necessary response to the contraction of the economy and the devastating impact on society.

By the time we were getting past that, the country was into the late stage of the electoral cycle. So it went in 2023.

Last year, the budget was crafted and shaped to appease and please enough of the electorate to vote for the outgoing government in the forthcoming election.

The result in November’s poll suggests that buying people’s votes with their own money certainly worked on this occasion.

Things had to be reined in this year or the national coffers would be heading into a state of recklessness, certainly according to various financial watchdogs.

It’s also at the start of the electoral cycle, so come what may over the next four years, the next general election will not be won or lost on what was announced in this budget.

The second feature is the choices that were made within the constrained parameters.

For instance, at a time when the economy is doing so well, there has been an increase in child poverty. 

There have been repeated promises to tackle it, yet this budget offered precious little. 

Doherty, Nash, and the Social Democrats’ Cian O’Callaghan all referenced that one in five children is now living in poverty.

“That is shocking that you have allowed this to happen,” Doherty thundered. “That’s over 200,000 children … a national disgrace. It didn’t happen by accident, it is happening because of budgets you delivered.”

No second tier of child benefit

There has long been a proposal on the table for a second tier of child benefit which, it is estimated, would lift 40,000 children out of poverty. The Government appears to be of the opinion that the whole thing is more trouble than it is worth.

To do so would cost an estimated €772m. But instead, the budget cuts the Vat rate in the hospitality sector from 13.5% to 9% at a cost of €681m.

The moniker now being applied to Tuesday’s plan is the ‘Big Mac budget’, as the cut will benefit McDonald’s far more than the small independent operators it alleges to target.

Chambers did reference the programme for government’s commitment to take more children out of poverty, and introduced the latest measure in this area.

“Guided by a new child poverty target of no more than 3% of children living in consistent poverty by 2030, a multi-year programme of supports begins today. I am happy to announce a €300m package of supports for children and families.”

While the measure was welcomed, nobody who works in the area believes it will have a serious impact on a growing problem.

What's your view on this issue?

You can tell us here

This was a budget more focused on business, and the need to ensure that the economy is equipped for any approaching storm rather than alleviating the worst ravages of poverty.

That’s the choice that was taken this year.

Donohoe, in concluding his speech, said the choices were necessary to protect against the future. 

“Through our investment in people, jobs, and homes, we are determined to meet the challenges we face today and realise our hopes and ambitions for tomorrow,” he said.

Those choices may not come back to haunt this Government, but they come at a cost to some of the most vulnerable members of society.