Harris says he's not convinced there's a need for a ‘significant rise in the dole'
He said he was keeping an 'open mind' in relation to Budgetary measures, saying there is 'only so much money in the pot'.
He was speaking amid a Government row over student fee changes.
Speaking to reporters today, Mr Harris said: 'I do always think there's merit in not looking at social welfare payments with a uniformity across the board because, you know, we've been talking a lot about college fees in the last couple of days, unexpectedly perhaps.
'But roughly speaking, the equivalent of €1.20/€1.25 on every social welfare payment is roughly the equivalent of reducing the college fees by €1,000.
'So budgets are all about choices, they're all about balance, and there's only so much money in the pot.'
He added: 'I'm not convinced that you need to see as significant a rise in the dole as you do in the pension, for example, at a time when our country is in full employment, when there's lots of supports out there for people getting into work, when there's other supports out there for people who can't work for very many good reasons.
'That's my view. We'll thrash all this out in the Budget.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Examiner
an hour ago
- Irish Examiner
Mick Clifford: Third-level fee rise sparks backlash — but who is really hardest hit?
For most of the week, a cohort of middle Ireland was on RTÉ's Liveline. Joe is no longer there to talk to, so they made do with Philip. And boy, did they have a lot to get off their chests. The topic that has got many people angry enough to pick up the phone is what looks like an increase in third-level fees. This payment is called a 'registration fee'. It stood at €3,000 but was reduced in 2022 to €2,000 as a cost of living measure. This was one of a number of supports provided by the Government to offset steep inflation. Then, this week, the minister for higher education James Lawless, let it be known that the fee will revert to €3,000 in the next budget. Cue outrage. It should be noted that the Government is being hoist on its own petard. Once the reduction was introduced there was no way it was going to be clawed back until the election was done and dusted. Those who send their children to third-level are the heart of the electorate. They needed some loving if they were to do the right thing at the ballot box. Now the returned Government is learning that unless you want to be reckless, there arrives a reckoning. What they giveth before the election, they taketh away once returned to the pig's back. Opposition The first strand of opposition to the measure came from, well, within the Government. Fine Gael are all against it. A primary reason for this is that one area where the party is wildly popular is the fee-paying second-level sector, from which practically 100% of Leaving Cert students go onto third-level. (Nationally the figure is around 75%). Those parents are willing to fork out up €8,000 annually to give their children the best start and advantage possible, and that is laudable. But apparently, for some at least, it is outrageous that they should be asked to revert to the original registration fee for a third-level which is already subsidised by all taxpayers, not just those who have offsprings attending the sector. What we have, we hold, would appear to be the prevailing sentiment. When the news broke, Liveline went into overdrive. At times like these, I always revert to my favourite example of Liveline outrage. This was back in 2009, in the wake of an economic crash that would ultimately result in widespread devastation, most particularly on those least able to bear it. One of the measures introduced by a government on the precipice of bankruptcy was a €200 tax on second or more homes. So onto the radio comes this woman who was absolutely devastated. Where, she demanded of Joe, was she supposed to come up with the €1,400 that would be required for her seven properties? Did the government think money grew on trees, or maybe in the flower boxes at the windows of her various properties? So it went in the last days of the suspended reality that informed the Celtic Tiger years. Financial impact Any increase in taxes or fees or charges is going to have an impact on a cohort of the population. That goes without saying. For some people this impact might reverberate in the weekly food shopping, which is pretty devastating, particularly when there are children involved. For others, quite possibly, it might demand a rethink of various holiday plans. And, for more again, the impact might be on a lifestyle that has come to be considered a right rather than, in any element, a luxury. Just a few facts might be noteworthy in terms of the debate this week. A household must be earning at least €115,000 to be liable for the full registration fee. That's not a huge sum these days, but it is over twice the average industrial wage. Nearly all parents who have to pay the fee are homeowners, putting them on one side of a growing divide in society today. As homeowners, they pay a property tax that would be considered a joke in the vast majority of developed countries. Their wealth, as measured by their biggest asset, has increased exponentially in the last fifteen years. This cohort of society is also likely to be among those who account for the €158bn which the Central Bank reports represents household savings in the State. On paper, in general, by the standards that apply to society as a whole, the cohort liable for the full registration fee are doing relatively well in today's world There will be some who have particular circumstances which would render an increase in the fee as delivering a blow rather than an adjustment. Included among these are parents who must locate accommodation for their offspring. Certainly, some allowance should be made there, but beyond that, are we talking real hardship for a considerable number of people? Is it all about who shouts the loudest on air, delivering narratives that are heavy with emotion but simply cannot be verified? There was no outrage recently when the CSO published its latest Survey of Income and Living Standards which revealed that over a quarter of a million children are experiencing 'enforced deprivation'. These children are defined as living in a household that was unable to afford the goods and services which are considered the minimum essentials for a decent standard of living such as being able to buy a winter coat, afford a new pair of shoes or being able to replace broken furniture. These children, in all likelihood, will never have to worry about third-level education, not to mind registration fees. According to the ESRI, childhood poverty increases the chances of 'greater interaction with the criminal justice system', and is also associated with 'lower third-level education and higher rates of unemployment in adulthood'. Should children in these circumstances be given any kind of priority when it comes to deciding how best to spend public money? Apart from priorities, a whole range of financial watchdogs and monitors have asserted that the State is underfunded. This is definitely the case in third-level education. Infrastructure to support home building is particularly bad, but extra funds will also be required to tackle an aging population and the ravages of climate change. Where is that money going to come from? At the rate we're going it won't be from those at the heart of the electorate who shout the loudest. We live in difficult and uncertain times. There are various problems and challenges across society, some life-defining, others worrying and yet more capable of heightening public anger. But are priorities to be decided exclusively on who is best at utilising the media, at threatening politicians to withdraw support, at knowing how to play the system? If that continues to be the defining compass in determining policy there will be a bigger cost to pay in the future. And it won't be just those at the lower rungs of the socio-economic ladder who will be paying it.
Irish Examiner
2 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
Irish Examiner view: Beware this new race to the bottom of the ocean
Space, as Captain Kirk used to remind us, is the 'final frontier'. But the environment that might concern us most in the next 50 years is the ocean. As a country that has a long coastline, more than 7,500km of it, and extensive claims to the seabeds that surround us, we must pay close attention to what is happening on the seas, beneath them, and above the ocean waves. For those who value our native birdlife — and that is all of us, surely — Ireland's belated efforts to recognise and protect the breeding and feeding grounds which create a diversity of species are a welcome, if overdue, move. Birdwatch Ireland wants the Government to catch up with European colleagues in designating key locations — 73 in our case, 24 of them out at sea — as protected areas. These include marine locations where birds gather in numbers to eat, preen, and socialise. There are increasing threats, including intensive offshore developments, such as wind farms. Greedy eyes are being cast over myriad opportunities to colonise the seas, which go way beyond the current human depredations of intensive fishing, plastic pollution, and climate change. Last month's UN conference on the oceans in Nice — non-participants included the US, of course — spent much time focusing on the potential impact of deep-sea mining. This is an activity that has only been undertaken on a small exploratory scale so far, but runs the risk of expanding exponentially as the pursuit of the world's rare minerals — the ones needed to power technology and energy transition — rapidly gathers pace. Deep-sea mining involves extracting resources from ocean floors rich in cobalt, manganese, nickel, and copper, often at depths of between 4,000-6,000m. US president Donald Trump has already issued an executive order entitled 'Unleashing America's Offshore Critical Minerals and Resources'. This observes that the US has a 'core national security and economic interest' in developing seabed minerals. UN restrictions, it says, would be 'inconsistent' with its sovereignty. But the US is far from alone in its ambitions. Norway, with its huge experience in oil and gas exploration, is in the vanguard of countries jockeying for position. Canada and South Korea are also prime movers. China and Russia, in the Arctic, view deep-sea mining as a vital element of longer-term geopolitical strategies. Some analysts believe that there is a $17 trillion profit to be gained, mainly for private mining companies. But in the enthusiasm to stake a claim in the new Klondike, little thought has been given to the net costs and environmental and economic impacts. Some scientists worry that entire ecosystems could be destroyed by devastating the sea floor and that marine life would be smothered by plumes of sediment. We are one of the 37 countries that have backed a precautionary moratorium and called for more research. Anyone who has watched David Attenborough's most recent National Geographic documentary, Ocean, on Disney+ — some critics say it is his greatest and most challenging work — will appreciate the scale of threat to marine life. But mineral exploitation is a topic which is barely on the radar of the general public at this time. This will change as consequences become apparent. Humankind may remember what happened to the Ancient Mariner in the poem by Samuel Coleridge, when he had the temerity to interfere recklessly in the natural order of life. In that case, the unfortunate seaman was lucky enough to find redemption and salvation by changing his ways. Based on current evidence, we may not be so fortunate. 'Beat the Lotto' a reminder of simpler times Because there is plenty to make us grimace in 2025, anything which leavens the mixture, or transports us back to more innocent, less frenetic, times is welcome. Into that category should be placed Ross Whitaker's enjoyable account of a syndicate's 1992 attempt to game the national lottery, ensure the jackpot prize for themselves, beat the system, and earn the admiration of many, if not quite all, fellow citizens for their cheek and enterprise. Stefan Klincewicz speaking with Pat Kenny on his TV chat show in the 1990s in the new documentary, 'Beat the Lotto'. Beat the Lotto, which reaches cinemas this weekend, recreates the caper where a group, headed by Cork mathematician and accountant Stefan Klincewicz, devised a cunning plan to buy every possible lottery combination requiring some two million number squares to be filled in by hand. The story of what happened is an irresistible tribute to ingenuity and the concept that hope springs eternal in the human breast. And our collective love for some good-tempered roguish humour. Ocean's Eleven it's not, but its portrayal of Ireland in the late 1980s/early '90s, the dog days before the arrival of the Celtic Tiger and the era when booms were getting boomier, is unmissable. It's a shame, but perhaps understandable that the National Lottery didn't take the chance to contribute but, as the director says, they 'didn't remember the episode all that fondly'. Like another foundation story of 21st-century Ireland, the movie Saipan, which retells the story of the schism between Roy Keane and Mick McCarthy before the 2002 World Cup, it's an episode which could, perhaps, only have been created here. And it's none the worse for that. What's your view on this issue? You can tell us here Long-awaited reforms to defamation law Long-awaited reforms to Ireland's restrictive and punitive libel laws were finally passed by the Dáil this week, but not without some grudging commentary from TDs, which will fuel opinions that the bill doesn't go nearly far enough. It is unfortunate that the requirement for complainants to pass a 'serious harm' threshold was placed in the 'too difficult' tray by those who drafted the legislation, as it affects retail and hospitality businesses. Challenging a suspected shoplifter or someone exhibiting excessively lairy behaviour at a nightclub remains a gamble, and there remains no meaningful deterrent to frivolous or vexatious defamation claims. Hard-pressed shopkeepers and managers — and there are plenty of those in Ireland's villages, towns, and cities — will still have to decide whether to defend actions and incur costs which can rise to €20,000 or turn to their insurance and incur higher premiums. Even a victory may offer scant chance of recovery if the complainant has no means to pay. This aspect of the new law will fail to change behaviour despite justice minister Jim O'Callaghan's exhortation that businesses should 'not take the easy route' and pay out. Many of the headlines have already been generated by the legal changes which have removed jury trial from the equation, and the 83-61 vote in favour now sends the proposals forward to the Seanad. Ireland's defamation laws have remained unaltered since 2009, since then we have seen the explosive growth of social media and the creation of a Wild West of opinion and commentary which is instant, and often egregious and untrue. Simultaneously, much of what is often categorised as 'old mainstream media' has seen revenues migrate to online competitors. Public understanding of the changed financial circumstances lags the actual reality. Thousands of newspapers around the globe have closed, and many thousands of journalists have lost their jobs. While this produces a tune on the world's smallest violin from some politicians, those losses are a worry for democracy and a threat to the common wealth. Even as the bill has been progressing it has been marked by litigation which proved again that defending an action by a libel claimant is a precarious pastime. This week, Ryan Casey, the partner of murdered schoolteacher Ashling Murphy, won substantial damages from the BBC after it broadcast a discussion about the content of his victim impact statement in its Northern Ireland political programme The View. It was the second court defeat in Ireland in recent weeks for the corporation after Gerry Adams won damages of €100,000 in a case which incurred costs of between €3m-€5m. These eye-watering sums would drive many publishers out of business. Ireland's new bill includes a public interest defence provided statements are published in good faith and reasonable enquiries and checks have been made prior to publication. Such an argument has never been successfully run in the Republic. Whether there is a queue of editors lining up to be the first to test its efficacy is questionable, but there must be protections for honest journalism and enquiry, particularly at a local level where resources are stretched to the thinnest. Read More Irish Examiner view: Free bets escalate gambling problems
Irish Times
6 hours ago
- Irish Times
The Irish Times view on plans for the GPO: a terrible idea is born
The GPO occupies a space in Irish life that transcends bricks and mortar. More than a functioning post office or architectural anchor of O'Connell Street, it is the most resonant physical symbol of the struggle for Irish independence. It is no surprise, then, that the Government's vague and ill-defined outline for its redevelopment, framed in response to the Dublin City Taskforce report, has drawn such emotional and at times overheated criticism. Sinn Féin and Aontú have accused the Government of plotting to turn the GPO into 'a shopping centre'. While this charge is more rhetorical than realistic – the proposals include 're-imagined retail components' in the existing shops on Henry Street and the GPO Arcade – it reflects an understandable fear that the site's dignity might be compromised in the name of commercial convenience. The idea of a Starbucks beneath the watchful gaze of Cúchulainn rightly causes discomfort, however improbable it may be. Still, the reaction should not obscure the need for careful scrutiny of what is being proposed. Among the Government's stated intentions are to retain a post office function, enhance the public realm, integrate retail elements and introduce 'significant cultural uses'. Thus far, so good. But it also includes a plan to install a 'high-quality office element on the upper floors to meet ongoing and additional Government requirements'. This is where the proposal veers off course. READ MORE At a time when central Dublin is not short of modern office space – much of it lying vacant – it is difficult to comprehend why the State would invest in converting a historic and architecturally sensitive complex from the 1920s into more civil service workspace. Such a move appears not only unnecessary but tone-deaf to the symbolic role of the building and the opportunity it presents. The north inner city, and O'Connell Street in particular, have suffered decades of neglect and decline. The GPO, if imaginatively and respectfully revitalised, could be a cornerstone in the area's cultural and civic renewal. That opportunity must not be squandered. A successful redevelopment should put heritage and public engagement at its core. It must help residents and visitors alike understand the GPO's extraordinary role in Ireland's history, something the current museum on the premises only begins to do. It should also include new public cultural venues: not just one, but several, ensuring that this central, national site is animated with meaning and public value. As Labour's Marie Sherlock and An Post CEO David McRedmond (who chaired the original taskforce and knows the building as well as anyone) have rightly pointed out, there are better options for additional office space elsewhere. The GPO deserves more than functional repurposing. It deserves vision, respect and ambition.
