Sir, - The argument by Mr McCreevy and his Fianna Fail spokesmen that double-income married couples have additional childcare expenses which justify tax discrimination lacks conviction. This presupposes that the couple have a family, but many young couples choose not to have a family until they are ready - the "dinky" (double income, no kids) brigade.
In addition, many older couples with both still earning will already have reared their children but will be handsome beneficiaries of the Minister's munificence - and rightly so, probably, after years of being fleeced during the Haughey regime by tax rates in excess of 63p in the pound.
However, spare a thought for the very many single-income households with young families to rear and educate. They may have no choice but for one spouse to remain in the home, and they have the right to do this without being penalised and discriminated against. The point which all the Government spokespeople have glossed over and which needs to be emphasised is that double-income couples have just that: double incomes. Given the state of the economy, nobody argues that they are not entitled to the proposed pay-back, but so too are the couples he now seeks to penalise. After all, as taxpayers, it's only a refund of their own money.
The key issue which the Budget attempts to address is the extra cost of childcare where both spouses have to go out and work, so why not target this head-on by allowing a direct tax write-off to those double-income couples with children, rather than attack the problem with the indiscriminate blunt instrument the Minister is wielding?
But it is the arrogance of Fianna Fail in trying to defend this measure that most disturbs. I doubt if Mr McCreevy and the Cabinet were the sole architects of this Budget and somewhere in there I think we can detect the influence of IBEC and the ESRI. And where do Mary Harney and the PDs stand on all of this? This will be the first real test for the PDs and indeed the three Independents.
If this Budget is allowed to go through without amendment, do not be surprised to see thousands of spurious new jobs being "created" by self-employed and professionals "employing" their spouses. The proposal is full of loopholes - and once again it will be the well off and well educated who will best capitalise on these. - Yours, etc.,
Tony Rodgers, Kilbane, Castletroy, Limerick.