Showing posts with label rory hearne. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rory hearne. Show all posts
Wednesday, 24 August 2016
Despite recovery, Ireland remains a hugely unequal society
Rory Hearne: The fact that the number of homeless children in the capital exceeds 2,000 for the first time since current records began is further evidence Ireland is a deeply unequal country. Economic inequality is worsening despite the recovery and, for those experiencing inequality, particularly children, Ireland is a very harsh place.
Thursday, 4 November 2010
View from the front line: impacts of cuts to community employment
Guest post by Dr Rory Hearne
In an effort to highlight what are the potential real human and economic impacts of some of the proposed December budget cuts I asked a few young women on the FAS-funded Community Employment scheme in the area where I work if they would tell me their approximate weekly income and expenditure.
One woman, with three young children, explained that her total weekly income is €517. That included a ‘double payment’ of €305 a week from FAS and €212 from Social Welfare. Her total weekly basic expenditure, at the minimum, is €461. This included €90 a week on the crèche, €25 on bus fare, €38 on rent, €30 on ESB, €30 on Gas, €200 on food shopping, not including kids lunches, €20 on mobile phones, €28 a week on football and other kid’s training costs. That leaves €56 at the end of the week. The other women were in similar situations. Another woman, for example, with two kids, had a weekly income of €405 (FAS and Social Welfare). Her basic expenditure was €385 including €60 a week on the crèche, €50 on rent, €30 on gas, €30 on ESB, €50 on travel, €150 on food shopping and €15 for mobile phone. Leaving her with a tiny sum of €20 euro to spare at the end of the week.
These people are finding it extremely difficult to survive at the moment on their low incomes. Just think about it. How do they afford additional costs of clothes, shoes, pharmacy medicines (not always covered under medical card), additional bus and rail travel, birthday parties, Christmas? Not to mind what many would consider basic things to do and have, such as going out for a meal or a trip to a leisureplex an odd time. They spoke similarly of the difficulty of paying for activities for their children - boxing clubs, dancing, football – which could cost anything from €40 to €50 a week. Even if these overall income and expenditure figures approximated to the truth, it demonstrates two things.
Firstly, further cuts in social welfare in the budget or increases in gas and ESB prices will have a terrible human impact. Those on such low incomes will ‘get by’ only with huge difficulty. As a result, and already we are witnessing as Christmas approaches, the use of money lenders is on the rise. Their grip of harassment and intimidation hanging over a family can be devastating.
Secondly, it provides strong supportive evidence to the argument that cutting welfare spending directly impacts on economic growth. Look at the areas of expenditure of these welfare recipients. It is on the local crèche, the local authority, Bord Gais, ESB, Dublin Bus, local and larger supermarkets, phone companies, local sports organisations etc. It is all being spent directly in the Irish economy. Indeed much is on the state and semi state sectors.
A notable double-edged sword for the Irish state is that the local authority rent is set according to the individual’s income so if their welfare payment is cut the local authority’s income will be reduced, requiring further subsidy from the state. The state thus cuts itself.
Another point that these figures raise is that the reduction in income will mean a reduced spend on the services being provided in the communities they live in – such as the crèche, local shops and sports organisations etc – so the retrenchment will hit the lower income sections of our society at two levels: as individuals experiencing a reduction in direct income and, as local areas, geographically. This is because lower income areas will have less spent in those areas after the budget as the individuals living in them experience income reductions. Thus the poor and vulnerable get disproportionally affected on multiple scales.
Interestingly it highlights also the important role of social housing. With significantly higher rents these people would simply not survive financially.
From a human perspective, how will children growing up in this household feel? The poverty causes depression. There is the stress of not being able to provide a ‘proper’ birthday party and presents or a ‘good’ Christmas. Where is the money to give to the teenagers for a new top or for the cinema? How stigmatised will those teenagers feel as a result? What social impacts will this have on mental health, on youth anti-social behaviour, crime, vandalism, education drop out? What wider costs will this have to Irish society and the economy?
The so called ‘double payment’ as part of FAS’ Community Employment scheme clearly plays a vital role in the lives of these individuals, and therefore, should not be cut in the budget. The schemes also provide much needed support in these communities in service provision providing employees for homework clubs, crèches, senior citizen support and others.
In an effort to highlight what are the potential real human and economic impacts of some of the proposed December budget cuts I asked a few young women on the FAS-funded Community Employment scheme in the area where I work if they would tell me their approximate weekly income and expenditure.
One woman, with three young children, explained that her total weekly income is €517. That included a ‘double payment’ of €305 a week from FAS and €212 from Social Welfare. Her total weekly basic expenditure, at the minimum, is €461. This included €90 a week on the crèche, €25 on bus fare, €38 on rent, €30 on ESB, €30 on Gas, €200 on food shopping, not including kids lunches, €20 on mobile phones, €28 a week on football and other kid’s training costs. That leaves €56 at the end of the week. The other women were in similar situations. Another woman, for example, with two kids, had a weekly income of €405 (FAS and Social Welfare). Her basic expenditure was €385 including €60 a week on the crèche, €50 on rent, €30 on gas, €30 on ESB, €50 on travel, €150 on food shopping and €15 for mobile phone. Leaving her with a tiny sum of €20 euro to spare at the end of the week.
These people are finding it extremely difficult to survive at the moment on their low incomes. Just think about it. How do they afford additional costs of clothes, shoes, pharmacy medicines (not always covered under medical card), additional bus and rail travel, birthday parties, Christmas? Not to mind what many would consider basic things to do and have, such as going out for a meal or a trip to a leisureplex an odd time. They spoke similarly of the difficulty of paying for activities for their children - boxing clubs, dancing, football – which could cost anything from €40 to €50 a week. Even if these overall income and expenditure figures approximated to the truth, it demonstrates two things.
Firstly, further cuts in social welfare in the budget or increases in gas and ESB prices will have a terrible human impact. Those on such low incomes will ‘get by’ only with huge difficulty. As a result, and already we are witnessing as Christmas approaches, the use of money lenders is on the rise. Their grip of harassment and intimidation hanging over a family can be devastating.
Secondly, it provides strong supportive evidence to the argument that cutting welfare spending directly impacts on economic growth. Look at the areas of expenditure of these welfare recipients. It is on the local crèche, the local authority, Bord Gais, ESB, Dublin Bus, local and larger supermarkets, phone companies, local sports organisations etc. It is all being spent directly in the Irish economy. Indeed much is on the state and semi state sectors.
A notable double-edged sword for the Irish state is that the local authority rent is set according to the individual’s income so if their welfare payment is cut the local authority’s income will be reduced, requiring further subsidy from the state. The state thus cuts itself.
Another point that these figures raise is that the reduction in income will mean a reduced spend on the services being provided in the communities they live in – such as the crèche, local shops and sports organisations etc – so the retrenchment will hit the lower income sections of our society at two levels: as individuals experiencing a reduction in direct income and, as local areas, geographically. This is because lower income areas will have less spent in those areas after the budget as the individuals living in them experience income reductions. Thus the poor and vulnerable get disproportionally affected on multiple scales.
Interestingly it highlights also the important role of social housing. With significantly higher rents these people would simply not survive financially.
From a human perspective, how will children growing up in this household feel? The poverty causes depression. There is the stress of not being able to provide a ‘proper’ birthday party and presents or a ‘good’ Christmas. Where is the money to give to the teenagers for a new top or for the cinema? How stigmatised will those teenagers feel as a result? What social impacts will this have on mental health, on youth anti-social behaviour, crime, vandalism, education drop out? What wider costs will this have to Irish society and the economy?
The so called ‘double payment’ as part of FAS’ Community Employment scheme clearly plays a vital role in the lives of these individuals, and therefore, should not be cut in the budget. The schemes also provide much needed support in these communities in service provision providing employees for homework clubs, crèches, senior citizen support and others.
Tuesday, 19 October 2010
Guest post by Dr Rory Hearne: Why aren't the Irish protesting?
Rory Hearne: A short while back, I was asked the question for the This Week Rte Radio 1 show was ‘why aren’t the Irish protesting?’
I thought about it and on reflection developed this analysis. What is it about France, Spain, Greece, Iceland – that they have all had significant protests in the last year against the cuts to public sector, increasing retirement age, fiscal austerity and bailing out of the financial system. Why are we not seeing any here? The answer is complex. It’s not just a case that Irish people just like to ‘moan’ from bar stools or on liveline and no other action.
When the first austerity budget was being proposed in late 2008 the pensioners organised (through, amongst others, the Irish Senior Citizens Parliament) themselves and protested. They successfully managed to get a roll-back on the plan to abolish their automatic entitlement to a medical card.
However, their momentum and success did not translate or effuse into the wider population. Last year, as the economic crisis deepened and the recession continued, there was an emergence of a division between ‘public’ and ‘private’ sector approaches. The public sector, represented through the unions, planned and held strikes against pay cuts. They explained that they didn’t cause the crisis and, therefore, why should they be paying for it. The emergency budget in April 2009 imposed a levy on the public sector and left the private sector generally untouched (either taxed or provided employment support). The private sector and the newly unemployed argued that they were suffering pay cuts and job loss while the public sector should feel lucky to at least have jobs. This division was heightened and manipulated by Government and other interests in an attempt to divide and conquer.
Then this year as the scale of the property collapse, the billions required for the bail outs, the drop in tax revenue for the government and economists and government threatening that the IMF and the ECB could have to come in with even more severe austerity, all led to a fear and associated paralysis taking hold in the Irish people. A fear that, literally, the country was going to be shut down through bankruptcy. The fear was successful from the point of view of the establishment as the scale of the crisis terrifies people. Unsurprising then in April the majority of the public sector unions agreed, on the basis that there was no other alternative, to the Croke Park deal and it was ratified by their members in June.
Throughout this period then while ICTU have argued for their ten point plan, in reality the Croke Park deal meant they have been restrained in the strength to which they can argue and organise protest for the other aspects of the plan such as stimulus through employment schemes, increasing taxes etc. Their case for an alternative approach has not gained popular support.
Meanwhile Labour has articulated different ways to tackle the crisis. But they have been unclear to the extent it is very different from the Government’s approach. Their position has been, not to organise protest, but, in line with its history and tradition, to argue that change will come through an election.
When we look at other countries it is the trade unions, large left political parties and civil society that have organised the protests. Here in Ireland, we can see from above some reasons for why such sectors have not led protests against the Government’s approach in the last few months.
In terms of Civil Society, there are small movements happening – the local hospital protests, the community sector mobilisations – for example. There is the Claiming Our Futures conference on October 30th which is looking to build, from the grassroots, an alternative vision.
But there is also something more fundamental going on. The Celtic Tiger period promoted an individualism that was underpinned by, in essence, the values of the American Dream. Big money was being made – by many people - apprentices, carpenters, builders, architects, retailers, hoteliers, developers, financiers, bankers ... the list is very long.
The unions had partnership where they won significant wage increases for their members. Concepts, values and policies of solidarity, discussion on what sort of public services do we need, of the distribution of wealth, taxation, and the organisational structures that would require articulation and mobilisation around progression on such issues were dismantled, were replaced by the values of individualism, and money was thrown by Ahern’s government at whoever made any noise. Now we are suffering from the fallout of 20 years of ‘partnership’ and the Celtic Tiger. This has left us divided, unorganised and, intellectually, unable to mobilise for or articulate alternatives.
Of course, our history has also had an impact. The left in Ireland is relatively weak in comparison to other countries. The North dominated politics for the majority of the history of our State. Social issues and the debate about what type of society we lived in were secondary. Just when the North was being ‘sorted’ in the late 1990s and social issues began to be raised, the Celtic Tiger repressed them again. Protest is not the key issue or question. Change is. How can we bring about a fundamental change so that we get away from the unsustainable boom bust model?
Dr Rory Hearne has worked for the past three years as a regeneration community worker in Dolphin House
I thought about it and on reflection developed this analysis. What is it about France, Spain, Greece, Iceland – that they have all had significant protests in the last year against the cuts to public sector, increasing retirement age, fiscal austerity and bailing out of the financial system. Why are we not seeing any here? The answer is complex. It’s not just a case that Irish people just like to ‘moan’ from bar stools or on liveline and no other action.
When the first austerity budget was being proposed in late 2008 the pensioners organised (through, amongst others, the Irish Senior Citizens Parliament) themselves and protested. They successfully managed to get a roll-back on the plan to abolish their automatic entitlement to a medical card.
However, their momentum and success did not translate or effuse into the wider population. Last year, as the economic crisis deepened and the recession continued, there was an emergence of a division between ‘public’ and ‘private’ sector approaches. The public sector, represented through the unions, planned and held strikes against pay cuts. They explained that they didn’t cause the crisis and, therefore, why should they be paying for it. The emergency budget in April 2009 imposed a levy on the public sector and left the private sector generally untouched (either taxed or provided employment support). The private sector and the newly unemployed argued that they were suffering pay cuts and job loss while the public sector should feel lucky to at least have jobs. This division was heightened and manipulated by Government and other interests in an attempt to divide and conquer.
Then this year as the scale of the property collapse, the billions required for the bail outs, the drop in tax revenue for the government and economists and government threatening that the IMF and the ECB could have to come in with even more severe austerity, all led to a fear and associated paralysis taking hold in the Irish people. A fear that, literally, the country was going to be shut down through bankruptcy. The fear was successful from the point of view of the establishment as the scale of the crisis terrifies people. Unsurprising then in April the majority of the public sector unions agreed, on the basis that there was no other alternative, to the Croke Park deal and it was ratified by their members in June.
Throughout this period then while ICTU have argued for their ten point plan, in reality the Croke Park deal meant they have been restrained in the strength to which they can argue and organise protest for the other aspects of the plan such as stimulus through employment schemes, increasing taxes etc. Their case for an alternative approach has not gained popular support.
Meanwhile Labour has articulated different ways to tackle the crisis. But they have been unclear to the extent it is very different from the Government’s approach. Their position has been, not to organise protest, but, in line with its history and tradition, to argue that change will come through an election.
When we look at other countries it is the trade unions, large left political parties and civil society that have organised the protests. Here in Ireland, we can see from above some reasons for why such sectors have not led protests against the Government’s approach in the last few months.
In terms of Civil Society, there are small movements happening – the local hospital protests, the community sector mobilisations – for example. There is the Claiming Our Futures conference on October 30th which is looking to build, from the grassroots, an alternative vision.
But there is also something more fundamental going on. The Celtic Tiger period promoted an individualism that was underpinned by, in essence, the values of the American Dream. Big money was being made – by many people - apprentices, carpenters, builders, architects, retailers, hoteliers, developers, financiers, bankers ... the list is very long.
The unions had partnership where they won significant wage increases for their members. Concepts, values and policies of solidarity, discussion on what sort of public services do we need, of the distribution of wealth, taxation, and the organisational structures that would require articulation and mobilisation around progression on such issues were dismantled, were replaced by the values of individualism, and money was thrown by Ahern’s government at whoever made any noise. Now we are suffering from the fallout of 20 years of ‘partnership’ and the Celtic Tiger. This has left us divided, unorganised and, intellectually, unable to mobilise for or articulate alternatives.
Of course, our history has also had an impact. The left in Ireland is relatively weak in comparison to other countries. The North dominated politics for the majority of the history of our State. Social issues and the debate about what type of society we lived in were secondary. Just when the North was being ‘sorted’ in the late 1990s and social issues began to be raised, the Celtic Tiger repressed them again. Protest is not the key issue or question. Change is. How can we bring about a fundamental change so that we get away from the unsustainable boom bust model?
Dr Rory Hearne has worked for the past three years as a regeneration community worker in Dolphin House
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)