12.07.2015 Views

The Distribution of Income in Ireland (2000) - Combat Poverty Agency

The Distribution of Income in Ireland (2000) - Combat Poverty Agency

The Distribution of Income in Ireland (2000) - Combat Poverty Agency

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

XIV <strong>The</strong> <strong>Distribution</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Income</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Ireland</strong>Forewordxvrelative <strong>in</strong>come poverty, i.e. greater <strong>in</strong>equality will result <strong>in</strong>greater poverty. Secondly, from a social justice or moral po<strong>in</strong>t<strong>of</strong> view, it is unfair or simply wrong that the benefits <strong>of</strong> economicgrowth are not shared more equitably, and that thosewho have most, benefit to a greater extent. Thirdly, <strong>in</strong>come<strong>in</strong>equality is bad for social cohesion and <strong>in</strong>clusion, lead<strong>in</strong>g toalienation <strong>of</strong> marg<strong>in</strong>alised groups, and the high social costs thatthis alienation or marg<strong>in</strong>alisation can impose. Fourthly, severe<strong>in</strong>come <strong>in</strong>equality limits choice and diversity, and h<strong>in</strong>ders theability <strong>of</strong> those on low <strong>in</strong>comes to participate fully <strong>in</strong> the political,social, economic and cultural life <strong>of</strong> society. This is a curtailment<strong>of</strong> basic rights and is contrary to the pr<strong>in</strong>ciples andobjectives <strong>of</strong> the Government's National Anti-<strong>Poverty</strong> Strategy(NAPS). Fifthly, it also appears from research <strong>in</strong> epidemiologythat <strong>in</strong>come <strong>in</strong>equality is bad for a nation's health and that thehealthiest nations are not necessarily the richest ones, but theones where there is the smallest gap between rich and poor. 1F<strong>in</strong>ally, it is now be<strong>in</strong>g argued by economists that <strong>in</strong>come <strong>in</strong>equalityitself can be bad for economic growth. 2Severe <strong>in</strong>come <strong>in</strong>equality implies a poor redistribution <strong>of</strong>resources and opportunities throughout society. If public policydoes not <strong>in</strong>tervene sufficiently to redistribute resources generatedby the market, this <strong>in</strong> turn this implies a poor rate <strong>of</strong> public<strong>in</strong>vestment <strong>in</strong> social and human capital, and <strong>in</strong> public serviceand <strong>in</strong>frastructural development, all <strong>of</strong> which are essential tothe long-term viability and susta<strong>in</strong>ability <strong>of</strong> current economicgood fortune.Whether the motivation is the reduction <strong>of</strong> poverty, the pursuit<strong>of</strong> social justice, a concern for greater social <strong>in</strong>clusion or acommitment to economic growth, reduc<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>come disparitiesis a necessary public policy objective.<strong>The</strong> <strong>Combat</strong> <strong>Poverty</strong> <strong>Agency</strong> believes that a radical <strong>in</strong>comeredistribution <strong>in</strong> favour <strong>of</strong> those on low <strong>in</strong>comes is central to reduc<strong>in</strong>gpoverty and creat<strong>in</strong>g an <strong>in</strong>clusive society - and later <strong>in</strong>Ro W uu^r R (1 " 6) **"****** ^Miction <strong>of</strong> meguality. London:this foreword particular policy proposals are identified draw<strong>in</strong>gon the lessons from the report's f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs. <strong>The</strong> <strong>Agency</strong>'s currentstrategic plan (1999-2001) identifies narrow<strong>in</strong>g the gap betweenrich and poor as one <strong>of</strong> its four key strategic objectives, and suggests<strong>in</strong> a series <strong>of</strong> strategic goals, how this may be achievedthrough a fairer distribution <strong>of</strong> resources, services and employmentopportunities <strong>in</strong> favour <strong>of</strong> people liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> poverty. 3POLICY CONTEXTThis <strong>in</strong>terest <strong>in</strong> a fairer distribution <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>come is not unique tothe <strong>Agency</strong>, but is a view reflected throughout the current publicpolicy arena, both at national and <strong>in</strong>ternational levels.<strong>The</strong> National Anti-<strong>Poverty</strong> Strategy (NAPS), the <strong>of</strong>ficial governmentpolicy on tackl<strong>in</strong>g poverty, commits the Government to. . . ensur<strong>in</strong>g that the impact <strong>of</strong> very rapid economic, socialand demographic change reduces social <strong>in</strong>equalities andsocial polarisation . . . (and) that the benefits <strong>of</strong> sound economicmanagement and growth are distributed fairly and <strong>in</strong>particular are used to tackle the underly<strong>in</strong>g causes <strong>of</strong> povertyand social exclusion (Government <strong>of</strong> <strong>Ireland</strong>, 1997: 2). 4<strong>The</strong> Action Programme for the Millennium, the current governmentaction programme, aspires to everyone shar<strong>in</strong>g the benefits<strong>of</strong> economic growth. 5 <strong>The</strong> current national agreement, theProgramme for Prosperity and Fairness (PPF), aims to substantially<strong>in</strong>crease the resources allocated to social exclusion. 6 <strong>The</strong>recent UN World Summit on Social Development <strong>in</strong> Genevaidentifies the need to "encourage Governments to re-evaluate,as appropriate, their national fiscal policies <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g progressivetax mechanisms, with the aim <strong>of</strong> reduc<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>come <strong>in</strong>equali-3 <strong>Combat</strong> <strong>Poverty</strong> <strong>Agency</strong> (1999) Strategic Plan 1999-<strong>2000</strong>1. Dubl<strong>in</strong>: <strong>Combat</strong><strong>Poverty</strong> <strong>Agency</strong>.4 Government <strong>of</strong> <strong>Ireland</strong> (1997) Shar<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> Progress: National Anti-<strong>Poverty</strong>Strategy. Dubl<strong>in</strong>: Stationery Office.Fianna Fail and Progressive Democrats (1997) Action Programme for the NewMillennium. Dubl<strong>in</strong>: Stationery Office.Government <strong>of</strong> <strong>Ireland</strong> (<strong>2000</strong>) Programme for Prosperity and Fairness. Dubl<strong>in</strong>:Stationery Office.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!