2025-10-16

People are really worried about their electricity bills. On Monday, the SSE Airtricity price hike is going to kick in. That is hundreds of thousands of households that are going to be hit with a big jump in their bill. That comes, obviously, after the hikes we have seen from three other companies since the budget was announced last week - a budget in which the Government made a terrible decision to cut energy credits and do absolutely nothing for ordinary workers. We now have a situation where this month, more than 1 million households are facing big electricity price hikes. So many are now wondering what in the name of God they are going to do because they simply cannot pay them. People have known for a long time that they are being ripped off. They are gouged by the energy companies and now they have the proof. The latest report from the International Energy Agency, IEA, is absolutely and utterly damning. It tells us clearly that these big companies are pocketing greater profits as wholesale prices fall, rather than passing them on to hard-pressed families. It will come as no surprise that Irish energy bills are now three times higher than the wholesale cost. In nearly every other EU state, the wholesale price drop is being passed on to customers. Households are getting a break in their bills, but it is just not happening here. Households in Ireland are being taken for a ride, used as cash cows by energy companies to fatten their record profits, and the Tánaiste's Government is sitting back and doing absolutely nothing about it. Twice this week, the Taoiseach was asked a very simple question: what he will do to stop this rip-off. On both occasions, he could not answer the question. I am here to ask the Tánaiste what he is going to do to stop this energy rip-off? Any Government worth its salt presented with the hard evidence that we have, that its people are being so blatantly ripped off, would be right out in front, ready to take on the energy companies, but Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil are happy to just sit back and let households get hammered. It is not just energy, either. It is food, rent, insurance, childcare. Costs are already through the roof and households are now facing the hardest price squeeze in 18 months. The Tánaiste will have heard from people, as I have. I spoke to two young parents in Galway this week and they are out of their minds with worry. They were just about paying the bills last year, just about getting by, but recently they have had to rely on family members just to cover day-to-day costs. Both of these parents are working and this constant rip-off has left them with that sinking feeling that there is no end in sight. The pressure is so immense. The Government's promise to have their back and to help is broken. It is in tatters. During the general election, on live television, the Tánaiste said, "You told me cost of living is worrying you – that’s why we’ll lower taxes and help you with your bills." Then he turned around and did what he did last week in the budget, with no cost-of-living package, with a tax cut package of over €2.5 billion, but without a single break on income tax for ordinary workers - not a single red cent. What happened? Why did the Tánaiste break his promise? The cost-of-living crisis did not end. Runaway prices did not stop. The pressure on households has only gotten worse. The Tánaiste broke the promise because the election was over. We know it, they know it. The Tánaiste got what he wanted and following through just did not matter to him. We know that Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil Governments are always on the side of developers and big landlords, but this Government is increasingly looking like a government for the price gougers, on the side of the big energy companies as they squeeze every penny out of their customers. People are not going to stand for it. People will not put up with being so blatantly ripped off. They want the Government to do its job. I have asked the Taoiseach twice now and I ask the Tánaiste: what will the Government do to stop this rip-off?

I will start by acknowledging the deeply upsetting incident that took place in a Tusla facility in Donaghmede yesterday. This is a shocking event. My thoughts and those of people right across the House and country are with all of those impacted by it, in particular the bereaved family and those injured. The loss of life is unconscionable. The focus must now be on the welfare and safety of the young people and staff at the facility. Tusla is working to put additional supports in place to do that. I also want to acknowledge the staff and members of An Garda Síochána who arrived at the scene yesterday. There is obviously an ongoing Garda investigation, but this is a horrific and deeply saddening incident which I wanted to acknowledge here. I thank Deputy O'Farrell for the question. I hope she tells those people she meets across the country that only one party in Dáil Éireann proposed giving subsidies to the energy companies. It was not Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil, the Labour Party, the Social Democrats, the Independents or anybody else here. The response of Sinn Féin in the last Dáil, its solution to the energy price situation, was to give taxpayers' money over to the energy companies.

Answer the question.

Steady, Tommy.

I am answering the question, Deputy.

Order.

The only other place that happened in the world was when Liz Truss was British Prime Minister. Sinn Féin's solution was to take hard earned taxpayers' money from young couples like those the Deputy met in Galway and give it to the energy companies, throw it away. That was never a good idea. I welcome the fact that the Deputy now acknowledges that it was not and is no longer pursuing that ridiculous, economically illiterate policy.

Order, please.

That was the choice on offer to the people in the last election.

You gave it to the vulture funds.

Sinn Féin's plan was to give money from taxpayers to the big energy companies and our plan was to consider permanent and sustainable ways of reducing costs. Again, I hope the Deputy tells people that we have taken measures in the budget to help them with the cost of energy. I am sure she tells them that we took a measure around reducing tax on energy in the budget. We decided to reduce the VAT rate from 13.5% to 9% not just for one or two years or to the end of the year, but for five years. I hope the Deputy welcomes that. I am sure she does. We decided to reduce the VAT rate and make that permanent for five years. That is an important and practical tax reducing measure that we took in the budget.

It is like the student fees-----

The second thing we did-----

Order, please.

-----was to increase the fuel allowance to help people most at risk including, by the way, working people. I do not like the way the Deputy suggests helping people through social welfare is not helping working people. Many, many, many working families benefit from the fuel allowance situation.

Yes, the working poor.

We have increased the fuel allowance by €5. We have also extended it to more than 50,000 households, including people on the working family payment – the clue is in the name: the working family payment. Some 460,000 households will now benefit from the fuel allowance, more than a quarter of the households in the country. That is a practical measure that we took in the budget. On top of that, to answer the Deputy's question directly, we have taken a very specific measure against the energy companies and price gouging by having a tax on the profits of energy companies which has yielded €271 million over a two-year period. We taxed the energy companies on their profits, but the Deputy left that out as well. On top of that, we reduced the PSO levy-----

Their profits are off the charts and the prices-----

-----for those on renewable energy.

The Government is doing nothing about it.

Deputy Gould, maybe one day they will give you a go at Leaders' Questions but today it is Mairéad so please let her do it. To try to help people with the cost of energy, we have applied a zero rate of VAT on the installation of solar panels, something people look for. We have reduced the rate of VAT on low emission heat pump heating systems. We have increased the number of additional needs payments. Energy costs are real, absolutely, and that is why we took a number of practical measures to help people in the budget and we targeted those measures at those most in need.

To be honest, and I get this all the time, sometimes I think the Tánaiste forgets that he is the Tánaiste and has been in government since 2011. We now have a situation whereby people are struggling more and more. Why? It is a direct result of the policies and budgets the Government continues to implement. The Tánaiste said during the general election that the Government would do this, that and the other because he knew the policies the Government implemented are making people worse off. The Government's policies have resulted in 300,000 households being in arrears with their electricity bills. That is happening right now under the watch of the Government. We are going into the winter and people will be struggling even more because the Government has cut any supports. Instead of listing things the Tánaiste thinks other people could do or should have done, this is on him. This crisis is on him. He needs to help those people who are not able to pay their electricity bills and will now have increased electricity bills. People will suffer as a result of the cold winter and the Government is doing absolutely nothing.

That is just not true. I just told the Deputy what we are doing. She asked a very important question on a very important issue. The whole assertion of her question and the premise behind it was that we did nothing on energy. She stood up, and the record of the Dáil will show it, and said we did not reduce tax. I am telling her that we reduced value added tax on energy bills for the next five years in the budget. That is an error – one cannot use the L word in here, but it was the first mistruth the Deputy told. Second, the Deputy said we did not help working families. We extended the fuel allowance to people who get a working family payment. That is a second mistruth the Deputy told. The third thing she said is that the Taoiseach and I had not said what we will do in relation to energy companies. I told her we brought in a tax on their profits that has yielded €271 million over the past two years. The Sinn Féin plan was to hand over taxpayers' money to the energy companies. There was a clear choice in the last election. The people gave their verdict and they voted for centrist politics instead of Sinn Féin policies that would have bankrupted the nation and spent €4 billion more in the budget.

Unfortunately, we told the truth in the last election. That was our mistake.

I want to start by expressing my deep shock and sadness at the passing of the young person and injury to others in an apartment in north Dublin yesterday. Obviously there is a criminal investigation and we are limited in what we can say, but there is an additional layer of sadness that this is an unaccompanied minor thousands of miles away from his family and community. As we understand it, this happened only days after arriving in this country. In the fullness of time, of course, there will have to be an internal Tusla investigation, but I very much hope that all of the necessary procedures, staffing and safeguards were in place when that shocking incident happened yesterday, in particular given that the care home is contracted to run on behalf of Tusla and not run by Tusla itself. There will be huge amount of trauma for the staff and other minors involved and we have to make sure all the supports will be in place for them. It is important to say that every day across this country care workers go in to homes that look very ordinary on the outside and do incredible work in them, whether that is caring for those with an intellectual or physical disability or children in care. I know from talking to some of those care workers last night that yesterday's events have sent a chill down their spine because the reality is that some care workers have to work in extremely difficult and challenging conditions where, in spite of all of the safeguards, they have to put themselves at risk every single day to work and care for others. This time last year we could not open the newspapers without seeing the Government make promise after promise to families desperately in need of childcare. They were told the Government could do something quickly about the cost of childcare in the early part of Government and we now know that is a broken promise. The Government said it would intervene with regard to supply. To be fair, it committed money to that last week which is great. However, as with so much with this Government, announcements are one thing but delivery is very different. I have very serious questions about the competence and capability in the Department of children and Pobal. Last year, parents across the country were told that more places were coming and €25 million was being put in place under the building blocks scheme designed to help existing providers expand. The process started, applications closed in January and feedback was due in March. Funding was to be spent in total by this December. Instead, not a single penny has been spent. Pobal only sent the contracts two weeks ago. We now learn from providers that there is missing paperwork. The earliest date for construction is two or three months away and all the while construction costs have gone up since applications were submitted at the start of this year. Some providers have told me they are unsure whether they will be able to proceed with their planned expansion because the original grant will not cover the cost of works. This is a deadly serious situation. Thousands of families are on waiting lists for childcare. Some 33,000 children under the age of three were on a waiting list last year and 10,000 children are waiting for an after-school place. All the while, there is zero urgency from Government. This is having a massive impact on families. What actions is the Government taking to ensure that the go slow ends in the Department of children and Pobal? What assurances can he make to parents that those promised childcare places from last year, let alone this year, will be made available?

I want to address the Deputy's first point on Donaghmede. I join with her in rightly acknowledging the very difficult, challenging, stressful and sometimes dangerous environment in which our care workers find themselves. None of us can fully comprehend the most horrific, tragic and saddening situation care workers endured yesterday. I want to join with the Deputy in paying tribute to them. I also agree with her that there will, obviously, need to be full answers and transparency in relation to all the procedures and protocols that were in place. As she rightly said, however, a Garda investigation is under way, and we need to allow that process to proceed. I obviously do not want to, nor has the Deputy, in any way interfere with the privacy of those involved or the ongoing Garda investigation other than to say that this is a very serious incident and needs to be treated as such. It is also an extraordinarily tragic and saddening incident. I thank the Deputy for raising the issue of childcare. I will speak directly to the Minister, Deputy Foley, about the issue she has highlighted in relation to Pobal and the drawdown of grants and where that is at. I will ask the Minister to come back to her directly. We are absolutely committed to reducing the cost of childcare to €200 per month during the lifetime of the Government. I will also acknowledge that the Labour Party was the first party to propose that, and there is now a political consensus across this House among pretty much all political parties that this is what we are going to deliver during the lifetime of this Government. I did say that I would like to see significant progress on it in the early part of the Government, and we can still make significant progress on it in the early part of the Government. We have only had the first of five budgets. However, we do need to see everything move in some form of sequential order that makes sense. There are 21 commitments in the programme for Government relating to childcare. The next practical step now will be for the Minister, Deputy Foley, to publish the action plan on childcare to see how we move the 21 actions together in a way that gets us to the €200 per month per child, absolutely, but that also makes sure that some of the issues the Deputy is highlighting and some of the issues I see in my own constituency and home town around places, capacity and the need for public provision are also addressed. There are simply not enough childcare spaces. That lack of capacity is having a real impact for families. As the Deputy acknowledged, we did in the budget provide funding to expand capacity in the sector while continuing to freeze fees at the levels they were four years ago. The cost of childcare does need to come down. The Minister will publish that roadmap and action plan very shortly. We need to show parents and providers the sequence in which we intend to move forward. We have outlined a record budget for childcare of almost €1.5 billion. The national childcare scheme, which has over 250,000 children currently enrolled, will be further funded for an additional 35,000 children next year, which is a 14% increase. In the coming months, the Minister will also set out plans for a new maximum fee cap set from next September, reducing costs for families paying the highest fees first across the country. The Ministers, Deputies Foley and Burke, and Minister of State, Deputy Dillon, have taken measures to sign off on a 10% increase in the minimum rate of pay for educators. That took place this Monday. There is money in the budget to do further on pay in 2026. We did also specifically target children most in need of additional supports, including expanding the back-to-school clothing and footwear payment to preschool children for the first time ever.

There is a serious credibility issue here. We see it with regard to the underdelivery of the social housing targets and, indeed, what we are seeing now with regard to childcare places. This is an issue that was raised with the Department during the summer. I raised it last week, and we have seen no response, frankly, from the Department on these issues. It is deadly serious for parents. Mothers are unable to return to work because of the lack of childcare availability. Parents are having to reduce hours and, of course, there are thousands out there who want to rejoin the labour force after many years and they simply cannot all because of the shortage of childcare places. Frankly, there is a lack of urgency on the part of the Government. Last year, people heard that urgency pre-election. We are not seeing that urgency now, and that needs to change. The other critical part of this relates to childcare workers. In January, we are going to see a 75 cent difference between what an early years educator earns and the national minimum wage in this country. The reality is that there is a massive retention issue within the early years sector. We have to ensure that those wages dramatically improve to ensure there are enough places out there for parents and families and a proper working life for those in the sector.

I assure the Deputy that there is an urgency on our part in this regard. I agree with her - I do not want to say it is not just a social issue because social issues are important - but it is also an economic issue that there are people at home today or who are changing their working hours or working arrangements, not out of choice but out of a lack of access to childcare in a way that works for them, their working patterns and their lives and families. It is a social and economic issue that disproportionately impacts women. There needs to be a real urgency, and there is an urgency. There is also a degree of political consensus at least around the destination or the North Star. I hope that once the Minister, Deputy Foley, publishes the road map and action plan, which I expect to be in the coming weeks, we can have good collaborative scrutiny and work on these matters here and at the appropriate Oireachtas committees. The Deputy referenced the previous Government. In fairness, I was in the previous Government. I led the previous Government for part of it. We did take a number of measures to reduce fees them year after year. I see Deputy O'Gorman in the Chamber. He was the Minister. I acknowledge his role too. We are committed to getting to the €200. The pay issue is important. That is why we have seen the order signed by the Ministers, Deputies Foley and Burke, and the Minister of State, Deputy Dillon. We have also provided funding for further moves on pay in 2026.

I have a tale of two speeches for the Tánaiste that he might help me untangle. Last Wednesday, in his budget speech, the Taoiseach included a section on climate change. He said: Climate change is not a distant threat. More and more, Ireland is experiencing at first hand its growing impacts. He went on to say: We have accepted challenging emission reduction targets ... and we have considerable work to do to achieve what we have committed to. We know there will be cost implications if we fall short ... We must factor these into our policy considerations. Later, on the very same day, at the opening of Stripe's new offices, the Taoiseach said, "I don't think we can mitigate for climate change." To put this into context, mitigation is the absolute central pillar of the global response to carbon emissions. He went on to say: "If we get into a position where we’re going to challenge every single thing, saying it’s against the climate, we’re going to divide society fairly fast and we’ll then get a negative reaction against good, progressive policies that seek to address climate and very serious issues.” It is hard to reconcile these two speeches made on the same day. The mismatch between them goes to the heart of the Government's approach to climate. That the Taoiseach can speak to the physical damage to homes and communities that extreme weather events can cause and the risks of fines to our country if we do not act on the one hand and then set that up against the idea that negative reactions mean we should not progress on the other is inconsistent. Undoubtedly, winning public support and making it as easy as possible for people to reduce their emissions is vital. That is why when we were in government, the Green Party cut public transport fares, made solar panels cheaper to install and increased funding to the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland to make energy retrofits a reality for thousands. Building support for the necessary measures our people and our country are going to have to take also requires leadership. It is the same level of transformative, risk-taking leadership that was shown by Lemass or T. K. Whitaker in the 1960s and 1970s when they transformed Irish society. However, the vision the Taoiseach articulated last week was "Careful now, do not show too much ambition" or "'Yes' to climate action, but just not yet, just not too much". We are already seeing the wasted opportunities that slow-walking approach generates, such as the removal of the ban on dirty fracked gas, the raising of the Infrastructure, Climate and Nature Fund and the Government's climate Minister trashing the work of the Climate Change Advisory Council. Is the Government willing to lead on climate or is it simply a Government of "just not yet"?

I have never heard the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, trashing anybody; it is generally not the way he operates. The issue is very important. The Deputy asked me to try to untangle it. In my mind it is quite clear. The Taoiseach, the Government, Members across this House and people across the country are very committed to the issue of climate action. I was sitting here beside the Taoiseach when he delivered his budget speech. I read at the time some of the coverage of his comments from his meeting at Stripe and so forth. What I very much took from what he was saying was the fact that when we are trying to accelerate the delivery of infrastructure, often including key infrastructure to help us meet our climate targets, we are living in a society where we are constantly being hit with judicial reviews and planning delays. While people have a right to do that and I respect that, it is somewhat of an irony that when we are trying to deliver projects that would assist with the climate, people take judicial reviews or planning objections on climate or environmental grounds. The frustration the Taoiseach was voicing, which I am sure some Opposition Deputies must have experienced when they were in government, was this issue of the public good versus the culture of blocking essential infrastructure. We see it in relation to water. We often see it in relation to renewable energy and major transport projects, including public transport. That is the point that I thought the Taoiseach was making in his budget speech. He was also making the point, as we all do, that there is no rowing back or ability or wish to row back from the Government's climate commitments. We provided €1.1 billion in funding for the Department of climate in the budget. We are absolutely committed to delivering on Ireland's responsibility to address the climate crisis. I see and know he also sees huge opportunities for jobs and our economy from that transition. The latest data from the Environmental Protection Agency regarding emissions shows that Ireland's emissions continued to fall for a third year in a row and they are at their lowest level in three decades. Emissions decreased by 2% in 2024 compared with 2023, and they decreased by 10.6% between 2021 and 2024. That happened against a backdrop of our economy thankfully growing strongly during that period. I know and acknowledge, as does the Government, that it is not at the pace required, and a 10% reduction in emissions in 2025 would be needed if we are to stay within the first carbon budget. There are real challenges and there is a real need to pick up the pace on climate action. I accept that point, as does the Government. The next phase is about acceleration, doing more and doing it faster. There is frustration across government and society that sometimes it takes so long to actually deliver projects. We need to address how we unblock those things and try to create that sense of society pulling together on the delivery of infrastructure rather than just heading to the courts or just objecting. The Taoiseach is right to try to create a public discussion and debate on that.

We have to judge a government by its deeds, not its words. When I see this Government row back on many key initiatives that were advanced over the past four years, I worry that it is quiet quitting on climate action. Regarding the Tánaiste's Department, there is not yet clarity from the budget announced last week of how much will be specifically allocated towards climate finance. As he knows, this is money allocated to the poorest countries that are most exposed to climate disaster to take actions to save lives and livelihood. The Taoiseach, as the Tánaiste's predecessor, announced in 2021 how important it was that Ireland would do its best globally and that we would reach a target of €225 million annually for climate finance investment. We were almost there. I think it was €190 million. Can the Tánaiste give us any good news on this point? Can he confirm how much the Government is allocating towards climate finance in 2026? Will it meet the target of €225 million that the Taoiseach set?

I need to get the Deputy the exact figure, which I can do once I leave the Chamber, but yes, we will hit the target. It is an important target. I acknowledge the important role that the Deputy's part played in government, including the former Minister Eamon Ryan, as he was at that time. We are committed to it and on track to hit that target. I will get the Deputy the number for the specific allocation. We are at crucial moment in relation to climate action. There is a need to accelerate and pick up pace. There is a point about how we bring people with us. I do not think the Deputy disagrees on this. He is the leader of the Green Party. He is passionate about this and tries to bring people with him on that. How we bring people with us on the next phase will be important. If we are to make the transitions that we need to make, it will require significant delivery of infrastructure, particularly around renewables. The point the Taoiseach made publicly when he met Stripe,is not an unfair one. If we constantly get bogged down in judicial reviews and planning objections when we try to pick up the pace of delivery, that will frustrate our collective aim.

I raise an issue that goes to the heart of the fairness and equality of public service employment, which is the treatment of single teachers under the revised spouse and children's pension scheme, introduced by the Department of Education and Youth under Circular PEN14/05. Since September 2005, every teacher appointed in the public service has been automatically enrolled in the scheme. Membership is compulsory. It deducts 1.5% of gross salary from take home pay every month to fund the benefit, payable only to surviving spouses, civil partners and dependant children, yet under section 6 of this same circular, the right of the single person to a refund that existed under the previous scheme was abolished. Today, a teacher from Carrignavar or somewhere else in my constituency with no dependants, who paid for benefits throughout their entire career will not receive one. There is no refund, no opt-out and no credit at retirement or death. That means in real terms that teachers on €55,000 per annum pay almost €825 a year, or almost €29,000 over a 35-year career deducted from their salaries with no possible return. To my mind, that is not contribution; that is an inequitable levy imposed on those through either choice or circumstances who are unmarried without children. It penalises the single person, predominantly women, and sits uneasy with the values of a modern republic that claims to guarantee equality before the law. Article 40.1 of the Constitution enshrines equality. The Employment Equality Act 1998 prohibits discrimination on marital status, yet here we have the State acting as an employer, forcing a deduction that treats single people differently from married people. It is totally unequal. I ask the Tánaiste and his Government if they will intervene and lead a cross-party departmental review with the Ministers for education and public expenditure to examine the operations and fairness of the revised spouse and children's pension scheme, access to mechanisms to refund an opt-out credit for those who are contributing without dependents, and engage formally with unions and equality bodies to deliver a fair and modern reformed system. This is not about money; this is about fairness, respect, and equality for every public servant - married, single, gay, straight, male or female. It is about righting the wrong of an injustice that has persisted for almost two decades.

The Deputy raises an interesting point. He has raised somewhat similar points about inheritance tax and the likes in the past as well. It is about fairness and equality in how our tax systems, schemes and the likes treat people. It is a debate that is genuinely worth having and it is certainly thought-provoking. It is quite a technical and complex area. Obviously Deputies do not have to give notice of the issues coming up on Leader's Questions, so allow me to do my best on it. Should we have a conversation about it and scrutiny of it? Absolutely, we should. I balance those comments by saying that equality is absolutely vital and I am proud of the journey this country has been on regarding equality and many of the positive changes we and the people of Ireland have taken over recent years. We also need to look at another important word, which is "sustainability" of pension schemes, particularly when the demographics of our country and indeed world are changing, with an ageing population and more people relying on that. Not to take away from the Deputy's specific query, but I make the broad point that often in a republic, we pay into things that we may not necessarily directly benefit from but we do so because we believe there is societal good, perhaps for dependants or children left behind. There is a debate about what I get in return for what I am paying into and whether there is a case for an opt-out in certain schemes versus what we should all be expected to pay into to create that sort of republic that plans and prepares for the future and those left behind. The Deputy has certainly provoked a thought in me. It is an issue that merits further consideration. Maybe at the relevant Oireachtas committee, we could ask that there be a presentation or a degree of scrutiny. That is a matter for the committee, but I would certainly be supportive of that. This changed quite a number of years ago. My understanding from general recollection is that it changed on the grounds of ensuring the scheme could be sustainable. The Deputy is asking how that compares with the equality obligations and that merits discussion.

I thank the Tánaiste for his reply. The policy itself offends the basis of fairness in the State. I am delighted that the Tánaiste has recognised that I have brought up in this House the unfairness when it comes to inheritance tax and when it comes to single couples. There are 36,000 single couples who do not enjoy the same benefits as the married couples, and 1 million people are childless in this country. If this was a private company doing this to its employees, there would be hell to pay, because it would be in breach of the Employment Equality Act. I am asking the Tánaiste to lead a delegation across Departments to see where we are in breach of equality. There is a constitutional test when it comes to equality, whether it is an inheritance tax or the opt-in or opt-out in this particular circular. I accept what the Tánaiste is saying about what we pay in and pay out and what we get for things but in all fairness, charging someone €55,000 over 35 years that no dependant, no family member, can benefit from does not seem fair at all to me.

Like I said, these are debates worth having because the composition of families and households has changed significantly in our country in relatively recent times. Sometimes schemes and legislation can take time to catch up with that changing reality. These are always issues that we, as legislators and policymakers, should scrutinise. When that opt-out was ended quite a number of years ago, long before my time in government, the grounds were also expanded to include more categories through which more people could benefit but I am open to correction on that. There is a broader point that two citizens could pay into a whole variety of schemes, including PRSI and the likes, and then at the end of a lifetime when you tot it up, one person may have derived more benefit from it than the other. We are not a private company in that sense. We pay into the central pot for the benefit of having that safety net and the provision of services and the likes. Let me reflect on what the Deputy has said today and revert to him directly.