Vol. 1068 No. 3
6. Deputy Noel McCarthy asked the Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Question No. 270 of 18 February 2025, to provide an update on his Department’s consideration of the Funds Sector 2030 report recommendations; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28158/25]
I thank Deputy McCarthy. The parliamentary question he refers to deals with the funds review and recommendations on the taxation of funds and policies. My predecessor, the Minister, Deputy Chambers, published the Funds Sector 2030 review, which was an important and wide-ranging piece of work. The programme for Government committed to progressing and publishing an implementation plan for consideration in budget 2026 because what we now know is that new technologies, the use of phones in particular, is offering retail investors easier access to investments at lower cost.
I have heard the feedback about the need for modernisation of the existing taxation regime, and I acknowledge the complexities in the current regime for an average investor. There is a possibility that, due to the changes happening in technology, younger citizens of our country will find it easier to make investment decisions about their own futures, which will help with their own economic futures. We need to take a step back and assess whether we have the right taxation regime in place and whether the regulatory environment around it and, in particular, the way we implement that regime, are clear enough.
We are going to consider all of this. It is likely that because there are so many recommendations within the Funds Sector 2030 report that the delivery may have to take place over many different Finance Bills and budgets. I recognise the growing importance of the funds sector as an employer within our economy and I recognise that the products it has available are being considered by more and more citizens. We need to look at how we support that.
I thank the Minister for his response. I believe the funds sector review to be an important contribution to the continued success of the asset management and investment fund sector in Ireland. According to the Central Bank, approximately €162 billion was held in deposit at the end of March 2025, earning relatively little for the Irish taxpayer. Recent reports have highlighted that Irish investors are increasingly turning to foreign banks in search of higher returns and more favourable tax treatment. At the same time, there is a wide range of Irish-based funds available, but the current tax regime is reportedly discouraging investment. In this context, I am given to understand there are potential economic implications for the domestic funds sector. Will the Minister provide a clear timeframe for the implementation of the recommendations set out in the Funds Sector 2030 report?
My aim is that we will be able to do this over multiple budgets and try to make progress on these matters. As the Deputy stated, this is a part of our economy that is growing. There is a case for it growing faster within the EU overall. The sector raised multiple issues over a few years that we considered in a more careful and systemic way in the Funds Sector 2030 review, which the Deputy just acknowledged. There are 42 recommendations within the review and some of them could be quite costly. Few of them are simple. We need to look at how, over a number of budgets, we can make progress on them.
It is very encouraging to hear Deputies raise the sector today, as it is now employing people in many constituencies across the country. This is a considerable change and one of the reasons I will consider the points raised by the Deputy.
I compliment the Minister and his Department on the work they have done so far. I understand it is a complex case and will take multiple budgets to iron out.
I do not have too much more to add what the Deputy said. There is a European background to this. There is so much in savings in Ireland and Europe more widely and we need to look at how we can use those savings in a way that helps to invest in our future and fund the big changes we need. The funds sector has a role to play in that. For so long, the way in which many of us saved was to put our money in a bank account or post office account or, as Deputy Gogarty referenced a few moments ago, we used it to buy a home or other property. These were understandable decisions. However, if we compare the way we save and invest to other parts of Europe, we can see that they make investment decisions. They invest in equities, stocks and companies, all of which helps companies to grow and employ more people. That link is something we need to do better on in Ireland and Europe.
7. Deputy Pa Daly asked the Minister for Finance if he has considered tax policy measures to reduce the cost of electricity relative to fossil fuels; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28216/25]
As the Minister knows, households are paying a staggering €350, or 30%, more than the European average on their energy bills.
During the election last November, the Government claimed it was going to cut energy costs to bring relief to households in a cost-of-living crisis. Instead, it is going to rip away supports. The Minister himself said that energy payments could not become the norm. Does he believe that Ireland's extortionate energy costs are normal? That is my first question to him.
I thank the Deputy for raising this matter. As I said in response to questions from his colleague, I, and everybody in this Government, is well aware of what higher energy costs mean for all sectors of our society. The electricity and gas retail markets in Ireland operate within a regulatory regime that comes from within Europe. These markets are commercial and liberalised. They aim to be competitive and they are overseen by the Commission for Regulation of Utilities. At the moment, the Government is considering, insofar as we can, regulatory decisions that could add to the cost of energy within our country.
Regarding taxation, households are currently exempt from the electricity tax while businesses per €1 per unit or megawatt hour for business and non-business use. In addition to the relief for electricity for household use, there is also a relief from taxation for electricity generated from renewable sources. In most cases, this is claimed at source by the supplier. This is intended to accelerate the decarbonisation of our grid and bring down the price of electricity for the consumer. Recently, the Government approved an extension of the 9% VAT rate currently applied to gas and electricity until 31 October 2025 at a cost of €85 million. The programme for Government is clear in recognising that we will consider and then take further decisions in this area to see what we can do to deal with the cost of energy. However, I need to caution against using money we might not have available in the future to pay for measures our country will see as becoming permanent. To many, this is a tough argument to make but it is one that is important to make at the moment.
During the winter in particular, I am contacted in the constituency office by people who feel that the situation is out of control. These are people who are paying their children's allowance against their rent and are forced to choose between heating, eating and paying their mortgage. The transition to renewables, which the Government is pushing, should not mean people are paying extortionate energy bills. The Government's approach, which the Minister has referred to as accelerating decarbonisation, places a disproportionate share of the burden for transition on households through the PSO levy. Rather than trying to bring the price of electricity down, the Government is continuing to push prices upwards by adding more costs. In other countries, like Germany, progressive general taxation is used to reduce the cost of electricity alongside efforts to redistribute the PSO levy fairly by making the larger energy users, such as data centres, pay a fair share. That could make a real difference to ordinary people. The Minister said that the Government's approach would accelerate the decarbonisation. I do not believe that is the case. It is unlikely because, for people on low incomes, it is a double punishment. It is not a just transition.
Am I hearing the sands shifting in Sinn Féin's policy on climate again? The Deputy refers to the Government pushing renewables. Does he not think renewables should be playing a larger role in our energy sector? I would appreciate in the exchange we have if he could clarify that issue. I accept that the cost of energy and the way in which our energy market is structured are causing issues and costs for households and businesses. We are looking at regulatory decisions to see if we can change it in any way. Overall, however, the decarbonisation of our energy sector is one of the biggest prospects we have to try to reduce our carbon emissions and give us a greener, healthier and, in the very long run, a more competitive Ireland. What we need to do, and will do, is look at measures that can help with that transition, but I do not believe it is responsible to spend money we may not have in the future.
Of course we should be pushing towards renewable energy but it is the way that the PSO levy is disproportionately put on low- and middle-income earners that is the problem. It is unfair and unlikely to accelerate decarbonisation in the households we go to where they have solid fuel at the front of their houses and are reliant on it.
Regarding electricity, the additional costs on household bills should instead be placed on the larger emitters. I do not see how the Minister can possibly disagree with that. Regarding gas and home heating oil, I refer to halting the carbon tax increases and reversing the past two years of carbon taxes. The Minister believes these taxes will accelerate decarbonisation. I believe they will not with ordinary poorer people who are reliant on solid fuels.
I am asking the Government to address energy affordability by reviewing the way it is tackling it, including the PSO levy and the network charges. I hope that will have the support of Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and, if they turn up, the regional Independents, if they continue to support the Government.
All the Deputies on the Government benches here today visit homes that use solid fuels. We all represent people in homes that are struggling with the higher cost of energy and who know the cost of living is high. We understand that as well.
Can they afford to change to renewables?
What we are aiming to do is display a greater degree of honesty to them than Deputy Daly is. Is it Sinn Féin policy now - I am really struggling to understand this - that it wants a refund of the last two years of the carbon tax increases? Is that its policy?
We believe there should not be any more carbon taxes on the people. The Minister is naive if he thinks those people-----
These are questions, not a debate. Go raibh maith agat, a Theachta.
They cannot afford to push to renewable energy.
People will be getting more and more confused by the Sinn Féin policy here today. The Deputy is saying there should not be any more carbon taxes and there should be a refund of what happened in the past while at the same time Sinn Féin Deputies come to the House every day of the week and want more retrofitting, more cycleways and more measures to help with fuel poverty.
Go raibh maith agat, a Aire. Tá d'am caite.
The changes we make in carbon tax help pay for that.
Does the Minister think the larger users are paying their fair share?
Can we just have one person talking at a time, one person standing at a time and keep to our time? That would be fantastic. Tá dhá cheist le tógail le chéile in ainm an Teachta Emer Currie.
8. Deputy Emer Currie asked the Minister for Finance if in cases where buildings are provided for childcare as a condition for planning permission for residential developments, a mechanism could be found through the tax system to help lower the cost of fitting out such buildings, given that cost is proving to be a major impediment, particularly for community childcare providers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28066/25]
73. Deputy Emer Currie asked the Minister for Finance his views on the way in which the tax system through, for example, tax relief could help increase the number of childcare places in communities, such as those in west Dublin; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28065/25]
I am not sure if the Minister is aware but we have planning guidelines from 2001 where for every 75 dwellings that are built, 20 childcare places are also to be provided. If it was happening, I do not think we would have the problems we have regarding childcare. Sometimes it works. I am sure the Minister has seen that in his own constituency. However, sometimes the builders are exempt or facilities are built but are never opened. I am looking for some realistic and affordable supports for the likes of community crèches and smaller crèches to make that happen.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 8 and 73 together.
Deputy Daly just referred to the regional Independents turning up. I just want to refer to how there is not a single member of the Opposition present despite its focus on speaking rights and the operation of the Dáil.
Regarding the important issue that has been raised by Deputy Currie, I appreciate its importance. Without the increase in the supply of childcare places, the efforts we have made as regards affordability have not had the effect we want. There is little point in making something more affordable if the places are not there to allow homes and households to avail of them.
The Deputy will be aware of the work the Department of Children, Disability and Equality is doing on this and the important work that the Minister, Deputy Foley, is doing to try to support the ongoing development and resourcing of core funding. Her Department has a programme in place - the building blocks extension grant scheme - under which she has announced a further €25 million to deliver an additional 1,500 early learning and childcare places for one-to-three-year-olds across our country.
I understand that 49 community and privately operated services have been now shortlisted for that funding. It may be of interest to Deputy Currie, given the very important matters she has raised, that employers have access to an accelerated capital allowance scheme that includes, for example, childcare services. This scheme provides for 100% capital allowances in the first year in respect of expenditure incurred on qualifying equipment and for an accelerated industrial buildings annual allowance and qualifying expenditure of 15% per annum for six years and 10% in the seventh year. We also allow, subject to certain criteria, income of up to €15,000 being exempt from income tax and USC.
At the heart of these questions lies an opportunity to link the provision of childcare places with the provision of new housing. Childcare needs a big idea that can deliver capacity at scale and value for money. I am not interested in the big chains that can do that already but in public supply and in supporting community crèches and the providers, primarily women, who have been running our smaller, independent, local facilities for years and struggling to do so. The Government is delivering new housing but can we also ensure that we are delivering childcare places in tandem with that? The mechanism that we currently have - the childcare facilities guidelines for local authorities from 2001 - is not working effectively. For every 75 dwellings, 20 childcare places are supposed to be provided. Sometimes, new crèche buildings are included in planning, are built and are opened but sometimes they are not.
I thank the Minister for the information on the capital supports but this forms part of a bigger overhaul of the planning guidelines to ensure that those crèches are not sitting empty, like they are in my constituency, that their use is not being changed and that we see more providers being able to operate in our local communities.
I will deal with the different issues that have been raised. I take on board the overall point that the Deputy is making regarding the efforts that we have to put in place to fund supply. That is being done in two different ways at the moment. At local authority level, the guidelines for planning authorities in respect of childcare facilities aim to make clear the minimum number of childcare places that should be provided for a certain number of dwellings that may be available in a new community or on a new site that is being developed. The planning dimension of this is getting clearer and clearer in terms of laying out our expectations regarding what should be built. From a core funding point of view, what we are aiming to do now is to work with the childcare sector to put in place the funding to try to help with the hiring and retention of staff. I understand that for the 2025 to 2026 programme, a further €45 million has been allocated, resulting in a combined core funding allocation of €390 million. I hope this, along with the implementation of the third employment regulation order, which is all about having the right levels of pay and the right standards within the sector, will lead to improvements in recruitment and retention. Regarding the buildings themselves, we have in place a grant scheme that is overseen by the Minister for Children, Disability and Equality, Deputy Foley, the aim of which is to deliver an additional 1,500 places.
I thank Deputy Currie for raising this. It is an important issue in west Dublin, including Dublin West, and we will continue to do all we can on it.
There is a lot of good in the programme for Government. It says that the Government will review these guidelines. It also commits to reviewing core funding and to the provision of public supply. I am here today to say that there are opportunities to combine those and come up with a big vision for the delivery of childcare in our communities. At the moment, there are exemptions to the rule on providing 20 childcare places for every 75 new dwellings. For example, one-bedroom apartments are exempt. Also, if developers say that there is a crèche nearby, then they do not necessarily have to include a crèche in their development even though it could comprise more than 75 dwellings. When the facilities are built, they are only shell and core and so may not be affordable for childcare providers.
We need to do what we said we would do in the programme for Government and pull on every lever to actually make delivery happen. We have to review and overhaul the guidelines but we also have to ensure that, when facilities are built, the places then follow.
I will raise these issues with the Minister, Deputy Foley, but I know she is aware of them already. I will discuss with her the measures we can put in place now to further increase the supply of new homes and the new childcare places that accompany those new homes. We have measures in place now with regard to helping with the recruitment and retention of staff and with the provision of childcare facilities within places of employment. We also have schemes available to help with capital costs to encourage the private sector to provide more childcare places.
As Deputy Currie has said, we need to look at the role the State itself can play in more actively supporting the sector in terms of the provision of places. The progress we have tried to make in the affordability of childcare has essential social benefits in delivering equality within the workplace and within the home, which is important. There are also important additional economic reasons for doing so. At a time of full employment, it becomes even more important to look at how we can help those living in and contributing to our country to return to the workplace, and childcare is an essential way in which we will do that. We have an array of different measures in place that are making a difference but I will work with the Minister, Deputy Foley, on this. I know she will be approaching me on these issues to see what further progress we can make.
I thank the Deputy for raising this important matter.
9. Deputy William Aird asked the Minister for Finance if he will consider extending the help to buy scheme to first-time buyers purchasing second-hand homes; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28039/25]
20. Deputy James O'Connor asked the Minister for Finance if his Department will revise the help to buy scheme to include those who purchased houses that were built in the past two years but were previously occupied and the original occupants have paid the moneys back to Revenue; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28175/25]
Will the Minister consider extending the help to buy scheme to include first-time buyers purchasing second-hand homes? I ask this question on behalf of many first-time buyers across the country, including young families, single professionals and couples, who dream of owning a home but find themselves restricted by the current scope of the help to buy scheme. The current initiative provides crucial support to first-time buyers purchasing newly built homes but it reflects a narrow view of the housing market.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 9 and 20 together.
The primary aim of the help to buy scheme is to encourage additional supply of new houses by supporting demand. It also assists first-time purchasers with the deposit they need to buy or build a new home. The scheme provides a refund of income tax and deposit interest retention tax paid in Ireland over the previous four years, subject to the limits outlined in the legislation. Based on the latest available data from 31 March, it has supported almost 55,000 individuals or couples to buy their own home. In addition to the conditions laid down in the scheme, including that the property be occupied as the sole or main residence of a first-time purchaser, the scheme defines a qualifying residence.
The legislation is very specific as to the definition of a qualifying residence. It must be a new building that was not at any time used or suitable for use as a dwelling. If the building was non-residential but has been converted for residential use, it may qualify for the help to buy scheme. Renovation or refurbishment of old houses to either upgrade or reinstate them for habitation does not qualify for the scheme.
Regarding second-hand properties generally, an increase in the supply of new housing remains a crucial aim of the Government. As I mentioned, the help to buy scheme is specifically designed to encourage an increase in demand for affordable new-build homes to encourage the construction of an additional supply of such properties. The scheme includes a claw-back provision where the minimum occupation period of five years is not met.
It should, of course, be borne in mind that the Government has put in place many other measures in addition to the help to buy scheme to support first-time buyers. They include the first home scheme and the local authority affordable purchase scheme. The programme for Government commits to the retention and revision of the help to buy scheme. As the Deputy will appreciate, any revision to the scheme would have to be considered as part of the annual budget and Finance Bill process and take into account the effective operation of the scheme and the impact any changes could have on the broader housing market.
That cuts to the core of the point I made in response to an earlier question. I thank the Deputy for raising this issue. The big concern I have, and I would appreciate his views on this, is that if the scheme were to be made available to homes that have already been built, it could run the risk of making those homes more expensive and, in turn, less affordable. I do not want to see that happen. I welcome the Deputy's views on this. The help to buy scheme plays a very important role, and I am committed to its retention, but I want to ensure that by having it available, it not only helps with a deposit but also helps with new homes being built.
Second-hand homes could be a more viable option for some first-time buyers but they are then excluded from financial assistance. An extension to the help to buy scheme to include buyers of second-hand homes would acknowledge the reality of our housing market. An extension would widen access, especially in rural and established urban areas where new builds are limited or priced outside of the thresholds. Second-hand homes may offer more affordability, more location choices and faster availability. Supporting buyers of second-hand homes would ease the pressure on the new-build sector, increase buyer choice and contribute to a more balanced housing market. We must ensure housing supports for all first-time buyers, regardless of the type of home they purchase. For many, the help to buy scheme represents the difference between aspiration and reality, and between renting indefinitely and securing a home to call their own. I urge the Minister to extend the scheme to second-hand homes to reflect the reality of the housing market in our towns, cities and rural areas, promote financial fairness and support first-time buyers in every way possible.
The Deputy is raising the strong views of his constituents on this issue. One of the many points of questions like this is for the Deputy to raise issues his constituents want him to raise and for me to do my best to explain why we are doing or not doing what he wants. As I said, the concern I have is that in addition to the difficulties we have with building more homes, we need to ensure that as we build more homes, they are built in a way that is affordable. My considered analysis of this scheme is that any change that would make it available to homes that are already built could have a real risk of adding to house price inflation in our country, given how many second-hand homes are bought every year. I thank the Deputy for raising the issue and I will take on board what he said but I want to do him the courtesy of giving him my view on the issue at the moment.
Other improvements to the help to buy scheme I urge the Minister to consider are to adjust the eligibility criteria and thresholds to reflect current house prices and inflation and to introduce a system that would offer higher support for lower income applicants or buyers in high-cost areas. That would make the scheme more equitable.
I have given the view on the scheme as clearly as I can. I completely understand where the Deputy is coming from and why he is raising the issue. As I said, it is really important that any changes we make at a time in which supply is still not increasing at the speed we want do not add to inflationary difficulties. I will take on board what he said.
10. Deputy Matt Carthy asked the Minister for Finance the total amount by which he intends to increase the carbon tax, by category, in each year until 2030. [28015/25]
Will the Minister outline the amount by which he intends to increase the carbon tax during the course of the Government's term, setting out clearly what that will mean for families and workers facing a cost-of-living crisis?
The Finance Act 2020 legislated for annual increases in the carbon tax rate of €7.50 until 2029, along with a final increment of €6.50, bringing the rate to €100 per tonne of carbon dioxide in 2030, with current rates based on charging €63.50 per tonne of CO2 emissions. Under the programme for Government, it has been agreed to continue with the planned carbon tax increases, which align with recommendations from the Climate Change Advisory Council, and to continue to use the additional revenues to fund social welfare measures, agri-environmental schemes and retrofitting. This approach encourages a shift away from fossil fuels and ensures those who are most vulnerable receive targeted support, making the transition to a sustainable future fair and equitable.
There are three separate legislative frameworks within tax law to apply the carbon taxation regime across liquid fuels, natural gas and solid fuels, namely, the carbon component of mineral oil tax, MOT, the natural gas carbon tax and the solid fuel carbon tax. The carbon components of MOT on petrol and auto-diesel are legislated to increase each October up to and including 2029. The MOT rates for other liable fuels such as heating kerosene and marked gas oil, along with the natural gas carbon tax and the solid fuel carbon tax rates, will increase annually in May up to and including 2030 to allow for the winter heating season.
The mineral oil tax rate increases up to the final year will annually add 1.7 cent to a litre of petrol, and approximately 2 cent to a litre of diesel, heating kerosene and marked gas oil or farm diesel. The natural gas carbon tax rate increases up to 2029 will add just under €15 each year to the average household natural gas bill, based on annual usage of 11,000 kWh. The annual solid fuel carbon tax increases up to 2029 will add 80 cent to a 40 kg bag of coal.
The carbon tax is unique. There is nowhere else we can point to in the current budget where we can say with certainty, "This is what the Government plans to do". We cannot tell pensioners where their pension will be in five years' time but we can tell them by how much precisely Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and those champions of rural Ireland, the Healy-Raes et al., are going to increase the cost of heating their home. We cannot tell motorists how much money will be given to fund the roads network or precisely how much will go to improving transport connectivity, but we can tell them exactly how much money will be added to the cost of driving to work. The worst is that none of this actually works. The money is not ring-fenced, despite what the Government protests. This is a revenue-collecting measure that disproportionately affects working-class, poorer and rural households. Does the Minister accept and appreciate just how bizarre this situation is? Will he finally see sense and engage constructively in order that we can tackle environmental challenges without fleecing ordinary workers and families?
This is a revenue-collecting measure that pays for public services and improvements in those things that can make a difference to a greener future for Ireland.
Annual increases in carbon tax have been ring-fenced to ensure that this money is used to fund the development of better infrastructure across our country, help with the cost of fuel poverty and fund things we know our country needs to become greener and healthier. Budget by budget, I have made changes in social welfare payments to ensure that those on the lowest income levels are not affected the most by changes in carbon tax.
I really would appreciate a bit of honesty from the Government. It is not true to say that the carbon tax is ring-fenced. The Comptroller and Auditor General confirmed that he could account for about 61% of it and be assured that it was going towards environmental measures. As with all Government decisions, taxes are collected and decisions are made as to how they are spent, so to say that we need the carbon tax to pay for environmental schemes probably sets out how committed the Government is to those environmental schemes in the first place. The Minister can talk about mitigating measures and alleviating measures that are in place but carbon tax will not do anything for the environment. It will just make the lives of my neighbours - families in rural communities who have no choice but to use their cars every day to drop their children to school or to go to work and who have no choice but to use the home heating system in their home - harder. I do not know why the collective that makes up the Government - Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and now the Rural Independent Group - simply cannot understand and appreciate that.
I was careful in my answer. I said that the increases in carbon taxes since I introduced this measure in the Finance Act 2020 have been ring-fenced. Before I put in place the increases to which we are referring, there had been a base carbon tax, which was the foundation for all of this and the revenue from which goes to pay for public services. The Deputy stated that it said something about my motives that we are using these increases in carbon tax to pay for measures that can help with the greening of our economy and country. Likewise, his lack of commitment to these carbon tax changes raises questions about how he would pay for these measures. I understand they have an effect and that there are many who find it hard to pay these taxes. That is why we put in place the social measures to which I referred but if we want a greener future, we must find some way to pay for it.
11. Deputy Grace Boland asked the Minister for Finance how the Future Ireland Fund is being used and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27604/25]
The Future Ireland Fund is a very important planning instrument for the future of the economy, particularly in light of shocks we know are coming down the track. Will the Minister outline how the Future Ireland Fund and the Infrastructure, Climate and Nature Fund are being used and their status at this stage?
The Future Ireland Fund and the Infrastructure, Climate and Nature Fund were established in 2024 following the passage of the Future Ireland Fund and Infrastructure, Climate and Nature Fund Act through the Oireachtas. The majority of the Act commenced on 30 July 2024. The funds seek to future-proof the public finances and deal with future challenges such as our country growing older, decarbonisation and the use of new technologies.
As the Future Ireland Fund is a long-term savings fund, drawdowns from the fund will only begin from 2041 onwards. The purpose of Infrastructure, Climate and Nature Fund is to support the economy in times of exceptional need and support the funding of designated environmental projects. Funding can be drawn down from 2026. The drawing down of this fund is managed by the Department of public expenditure.
Both funds are to be capitalised by annual transfers from the Exchequer - 0.8% of GDP per annum from 2024 onwards in the case of the Future Ireland Fund and €2 billion per annum from 2025 onwards in the case of the Infrastructure, Climate and Nature Fund. Over €10 billion has already been transferred to the funds in 2024. This year's transfer to the funds was announced during budget 2025. By the end of this year, the Future Ireland Fund will hold approximately €12.5 billion and the Infrastructure, Climate and Nature Fund will have €4 billion - a total of €16.5 billion.
It is very important to acknowledge the importance of these funds. The Minister mentioned demographic change. We know a crisis is coming in terms of the shift from those who are working to those who are retired and how the working population here will have to support those people. I want to put on record my support for and acknowledgement of the importance of these funds and the fact that they will be here in 16 or 17 years' time to deal with whatever difficulties the economy might face at that point.
I note the National Reserve Fund transferred to the Future Ireland Fund last year. The National Treasury Management Agency is responsible for the management of these funds. How are they managed? How close an eye is kept on them on a day-to-day basis by the Department? Can the Minister say anything about where those funds are or how he anticipates they will develop over the next 16 to 17 years?
The day-to-day management of the funds is done by the National Treasury Management Agency. The NTMA is preparing long-term investment strategies for both funds that will then be subject to consultation with the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform. These strategies are being reviewed and will then be signed off on by the two Ministers. The current investment strategies are being managed in a low-risk way. The funds are only invested in highly rated liquid securities with a low level of inherent risk such as the bonds of countries, as we develop these strategies.
I appreciate that. To what extent does the Department keep an eye on the appropriateness of those financial vehicles in terms of any human rights element? Is this a consideration?
I would expect those kinds of issues to be considered carefully by those involved in investing this money, which we are now building up. We had a debate last night on this topic in the Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation, and Taoiseach where I said that I am reluctant to put in place lots of legislation and restrictions regarding how decisions are made by the NTMA because it does a really good job on our behalf in managing the various funds we already have in place. Instead, officials in my Department are responsible for engaging with the NTMA on strategic and operational matters and do so regularly. My Secretary General sits on the board of the NTMA along with the Secretary General from the Department of public expenditure. We work with the NTMA on those two levels. To answer the Deputy's question about how we deal with investment overall, it is through authorising the long-term strategy and that process is under way.
12. Deputy Barry Ward asked the Minister for Finance to report on the progress of ensuring access to cash and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28047/25]
As the Minister is aware, cash is increasingly something many people do not use. One will often hear people say they do not carry cash at all but rely on credit cards and banking apps to make the payments they need to make. While that is very progressive in lots of ways, will the Minister tell us what he is doing to ensure cash remains available for those who need and want to use it?
The Finance (Provision of Access to Cash Infrastructure) Act 2025 is the result of a recommendation in the Department of Finance’s 2022 review of retail banking. The objectives of the Act are to ensure sufficient and effective access to cash in the State; to put in place a framework to manage future changes to the cash infrastructure in a fair, orderly, equitable and transparent manner; and to bring cash-in-transit providers, CITs, and independent ATM deployers within the regulatory perimeter of the Central Bank of Ireland.
The legislation will do so by allowing the Minister for Finance to prescribe in regulations access-to-cash criteria with regard to December 2022 levels initially, taking account of the exits of Ulster Bank and KBC. The regions used will be the eight regions of our country as defined by Eurostat.
The Act will require ATM deployers to be registered with the Central Bank of Ireland and provides the Central Bank with regulation-making powers relating to matters such as reporting requirements, service and other matters such as denomination stocking. The Act was signed into law only in May; work will now begin to commence the legislation. I expect the key regulations to be completed in the third quarter of this year.
While I am very much aware of the changing attitudes as regards the use of cash, I understand that for many people in our country using cash is still the main way they want to conduct payments. This speaks to an issue of inclusion within our financial system. I do not see it at all as being a technical matter; I see it as really important. If you find out you are not able to pay a bill or not able to use your money to make important transactions, it just adds to a feeling of not being part of our financial system. I do not want to see that happen.
I acknowledge that the Government takes on board this issue. Exactly as the Minister says, it is an inclusion issue, particularly for people who might not be tech savvy or might even have bad Internet coverage. The lack of access to cash can be a real stumbling block for them in accessing financial services and paying bills. I therefore appreciate that there is a governmental and legislative acknowledgment of the importance of cash. Some choose to use the alternative technological solutions, and that is great, but we must continue to make cash available to people.
Small businesses tell me that sometimes dealing in cash with banks can increase their banking charges and costs. Is there any intention to impress upon the banks the need for them not to penalise businesses and individuals for choosing to use cash over electronic means of funds transfers?
I will look at that issue. I am struck, despite what I said, by the number of premises I now walk into, like shops and cafés, that say "card only". I can understand completely the benefits they get in that regard. There are benefits to the economy overall as well in being able to record transactions and look at how tax is collected. However, I go back to the point I agreed on a moment ago. Not being able to use cash to access a service is something I am concerned about. I want to consider it further, and in my next round of engagement with our banks I will certainly raise with them that issue and the feeling that, as the Deputy said, small businesses may feel in some way penalised.
I appreciate the Minister's perspective and his commitment to that. Beyond the banking sector, there are businesses that will sometimes try to dictate to their customers how they will effect payment for a service or a good. Some people will say not just that they want a card payment but that it must be through a particular method - PayPal or whatever it might be. Does the Minister perhaps see a role in regulatory terms for the Government to say to businesses that they may not do that and that they must facilitate payment by multiple means, or at least more than one means, in circumstances where there could be a concern that dictating that payment must be made through a particular means would seriously restrict some people's ability to access that good or service?
I would be reluctant to give that commitment to the Deputy here today because I would need to consider whether that would have any unintended consequences regarding policies we have on the legal tender of cash. That is now being developed within the European Union. As I said to the Deputy, I will look at the matter. I want to ensure that citizens do not in any way feel excluded from our financial system. I cannot help but notice the growing number of shops and cafés I walk into that say "card only". That is not at all a problem for the Deputy or me, but there are some within our society for whom that can be a problem and, as I said, I do not want to see that happen.
13. Deputy Peter Roche asked the Minister for Finance the way in which he and his Department intend to help ensure that employment growth continues, given the increased global uncertainty; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28024/25]
21. Deputy Aindrias Moynihan asked the Minister for Finance the measures being taken in his Department's annual progress report on the slowdown on job creation nationally; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27804/25]
I appreciate the Minister coming into the Chamber to deal with the responses to some of the genuine concerns that people have about the finances. I ask the Minister where he and his Department intend to ensure that employment growth continues, given the global uncertainty.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 13 and 21 together.
It is always a privilege to be here as regularly as I am to answer the important questions Deputies put to me and to respond to the Dáil. I want to highlight where we are from a jobs point of view in Ireland. It is a really positive development in our economy overall. Total employment in the last year alone went up by 90,000 people, with the total number of people at work in our country now exceeding 2.8 million. The unemployment rate now stands at 4%, while the number of women at work is at a record high. The number of young people at work within our economy is at a very high level as well. I am sure the Deputy will remember - I certainly do - other times when persistently high levels of unemployment in Ireland were an issue that government after government really struggled to make progress on. It was the subject of much debate, research and analysis, why unemployment was so high in Ireland and why we could not get it down, with all the social misery that was then caused by that. While I know there is still much that we need to improve on in our country, to see so many people at work is so important. Behind every one of those 2.8 million people is the dignity of being work, the reward you get from it and then the obvious contribution to your own living standards.
As to where we are and what that means for the global environment we are in, that is the main challenge the Government faces economically. Regrettably, the background that helped Ireland create that level of employment for those who live in our country was a consensus as regards the rules of global trade and global taxation, a belief that if we integrate with one another through trade, that can deliver mutually beneficial gains for economies by getting more people at work. The House will be well aware that that is now being contested and that President Trump is taking a very different view with regard to trade.
What we are now trying to do is, first, through the European Union, negotiate with the United States to see if we can get a different outcome and an agreement on this and, second, within our own economy, look at the measures we can take that will sustain these high levels of employment. I point to the work the Minister, Deputy Chambers, is now doing. He will be in here shortly after me to discuss the review of the national development plan. I point to the work the Minister, Deputy Burke, is doing on the competitiveness of our economy. That is hugely important. I recognise the work he is putting in, particularly in support of smaller businesses. Then there is the work the Minister, Deputy Lawless, is doing on higher and further education and how we can have the right level of skills within our economy and look to develop and to change that as technology begins to change our economies overall.
This high level of employment is a really precious gain in our economy overall. We have to look at the contribution that all agencies of our State can make to contribute to it. I see our colleague here, the Minister of State, Deputy Moran, who will talk about the Office of Public Works. That is an example of a State agency that plays a really important role in skill development within our economy and then direct employment. We need to look at all of this now when the global environment is beginning to change so much.
I thank the Minister for a comprehensive response. No matter where you come from, there are, right around the island of Ireland, representatives like me who are concerned about the threat to any job, particularly in the more dispersed rural villages.
Everything the Minister for Finance can do would be much appreciated and is much needed. None of us was aware of what the volatile President Trump was about to do and the impact it would have on our economy. The Minister stated that there are 2.8 million people in employment and that the unemployment rate is 4%. That is resounding testament to how things are going in this country. I applaud the Minister for his continued and relentless efforts in that regard.
We need to look at all policies available to the Government in order to see how to make more progress in this area. Having been out and about with the Deputy a number of months ago in many of the towns in the constituency he represents, I am aware of the variety of employers located there. Due to the fact that we now have such a diverse set of employers in Ireland, we need to take a step back and identify the broad things we can do to help them all. I am convinced that these continue to be: having a stable economy in which people have confidence and in which we can continue to invest; avoid significant cutbacks in or changes to how we spend the country's money; and looking at particular measures that will help the growth of various sectors, from tourism right through to the big employers that make such a difference to our country and that we are going to have to work hard to support.
In east Galway, we are fortunate to have Dexcom. The company is at an advanced stage with its development in Athenry. It plans to employ many people there, which is really welcome. Most of us understand that some companies are better insulated against the proposed tariffs than others. I am heartened to hear the Minister's plans to safeguard employment and the measures he has taken or is considering to further ensure there is no threat to those in employment.
I agree with the Deputy. As he stated, this is an important achievement that the Government has to try to sustain. The Ireland in which I began my education did not have this level of employment. There is much we know we need to do better on and every TD on the Government benches is aware of the difficulties that we face and that we committed to trying to deal with. At the same time, having so many people at work is not only good for those in the jobs, it also creates the resources we need. Those resources, in turn, allow us to invest and spend. That is why the Government has number of decisions ahead of it. In that context, I refer to the work the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform, Deputy Chambers, is doing in respect of the national development plan, the work of the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Burke, and the important work of the Minister for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science, Deputy Lawless.
