Sinn Féin, like Father Murphy, will attempt to “Spur up the rocks with a warning cry”, here in Thurles.
There is no doubt that households in Thurles, across Tipperary, and throughout Ireland are under real pressure. Electricity bills, grocery prices, rents, mortgage repayments, insurance, childcare and transport costs have all eaten into family budgets. Nobody in Government should dismiss that. But equally, nobody in Opposition should pretend that reliefs, credits, freezes and subsidies come without a cost.
That is the part of the cost-of-living debate that too often gets lost.
The crisis Ireland has faced was not invented in Leinster House, Dublin. It came from a series of international shocks; the aftermath of Covid-19, supply-chain disruption, the surge in gas and oil prices, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, higher food and fertiliser costs, and interest-rate rises across the eurozone. Ireland, as a small open economy, cannot simply opt out of global energy markets or European monetary policy. The Government can cushion the blow, and it has done so, but it cannot abolish reality.
Budget 2026 shows the Government trying to do that difficult balancing act. It increased most weekly social welfare payments by €10, increased Fuel Allowance by €5 per week, extended the 9% VAT rate on electricity and gas to the end of 2030, extended the Rent Tax Credit, and adjusted the USC band so minimum-wage workers would not be pulled into the higher rate because of the minimum-wage increase. These are not slogans; they are practical measures aimed at helping people, while keeping the public finances under control.
That is the difference between responsible government and permanent protest. Government has to decide not only what people would like to receive, but how it is paid for, who pays for it, and what is sacrificed elsewhere.
Sinn Féin’s alternative budget proposed a €2.5 billion cost-of-living package, including €450 energy credits, a double child benefit payment, higher welfare and pension increases, rent measures and the abolition of USC on the first €40,000 of income. Those proposals may sound attractive when listed at a public meeting. Who would not like lower bills, higher payments, lower taxes and cheaper rent? But politics is not a wishing well. A €2.5 billion package must be funded by someone.
And that “someone” is usually the worker, the taxpayer, the business owner, or the next generation.
If the State pays for broad energy credits, the money comes from taxation, borrowing, or less spending elsewhere. If taxes are raised on “someone else,” they rarely stay neatly confined there. Business taxes can affect investment and jobs. Higher taxes on workers reduce take-home pay. Borrowing passes today’s relief bill to tomorrow’s taxpayers. Cutting or delaying spending elsewhere means less money for housing, schools, hospitals, roads, disability services, Garda resources, water infrastructure and energy investment.
This is why the Government is right to be cautious about turning every pressure into a permanent spending commitment.
Ireland’s public finances look strong on paper, but independent watchdogs have repeatedly warned that the headline figures hide real risks. The Irish Fiscal Advisory Council warned in June 2026 that Ireland remains heavily reliant on corporation tax from a small number of foreign-owned multinationals. It also said that, excluding excess corporation tax, the State is forecast to have an underlying deficit of €11 billion this year. That means we are not as flush with money as some political speeches expected from Sinn Féin suggest.
The same watchdog warned that most corporation tax receipts are being spent rather than saved, with only €1 in every €6 being set aside under the Government’s plan. It also warned that spending growth is running faster than the sustainable growth rate of the economy. These are not Fine Gael or Fianna Fáil talking points. They are warnings from Ireland’s independent fiscal watchdog.
The Central Bank has also warned that Ireland faces downside risks to exports and corporation tax receipts if US tax or industrial policy changes, with possible effects on investment and incomes. In plain English, the tax money we are relying on today may not be guaranteed tomorrow.
That is why the Government cannot responsibly govern as though every surplus is permanent and every demand can be met by writing another cheque.
Of course, Opposition parties will always say more should be done. That is their job. But there is a danger in turning every genuine hardship into a rallying cry against the State. Public meetings can easily become exercises in stirring-up anger, rather than solving problems. The old cry of “Arm, arm” may be poetic, but it is not an economic policy. Ireland does not need a politics that spurs up resentment while avoiding the hard question: who pays?
The responsible answer is that support should be targeted, temporary where possible, and affordable. Help should go to those most exposed: pensioners, carers, low-income workers, families with children, people with disabilities, and households facing energy poverty. But permanent giveaways funded by unstable revenues or future borrowing are not compassion. They are deferred taxation.
The Government’s position should be defended because it recognises both sides of the truth: people need help, but the State must remain solvent; households need relief, but workers cannot be taxed into the ground; today’s pressure is real, but tomorrow’s taxpayers also matter.
There is no such thing as free cost-of-living relief. There is only a choice about who pays, when they pay, and whether politicians are honest enough to admit it.
Ireland needs action, yes. But it also needs prudence, honesty and responsibility. Demanding everything immediately may win applause in a public meeting. Governing requires asking whether the applause today becomes the tax bill tomorrow.
Leave a Reply