I, too, wish to pass on my condolences to the friends and family of Tom Burke. Tom was a bright presence outside the gates of Leinster House and just a very nice person. He will be sadly missed here, although more so, obviously, by his family and friends.

I was going to address my question to the Taoiseach. I meant the Tánaiste. The co-Taoiseach, perhaps. People Before Profit is not a late convert to questioning the 12.5% corporate tax rate. We have done so from the very beginning. How does the Tánaiste morally justify the fact that for many months now, the Government has put, and continues to put, enormous energy and resources into preventing international efforts to have a minimal increase in the rate of tax on the absolutely staggering profits of some of the largest and wealthiest corporations in the world and make them pay just a little bit more tax? It seems to be willing to die in a ditch on this issue, in effect. We know that corporations are involved in aggressive tax avoidance and do not pay anything even close to the 12.5% rate but in reality pay approximately 5.5% collectively. Some of them pay far less.

Why does the Tánaiste think it is okay to try to prevent a little bit of extra tax being imposed on these staggeringly profitable corporations, but to trenchantly oppose efforts to reduce the tax burden on ordinary working people in this country? We pleaded with him last night not to impose a further tax hike through carbon taxes on ordinary working people, some of whom, such as the elderly, the vulnerable and the sick, will have to choose between food and heating their homes after the raft of energy price hikes. Now the Government is proposing to worsen that situation by imposing carbon tax hikes in the budget. Does the Tánaiste think Jeff Bezos is going to be worried about whether he should heat his home or have food? These people are making billions of euro. How does the Tánaiste think it is morally justifiable that workers in this country pay a minimum of 20% tax on their income but he does not think it is acceptable that corporations would pay the same amount in tax? Does he know, for example, that workers earned €130 billion last year and paid €27 billion in tax?

I thank the Deputy.

Corporations earned €200 billion and paid €11 billion in tax. In other words, workers paid 20%, on average, in tax and corporations paid 5%. Why does the Tánaiste defend the corporations instead of looking after working people?

I thank the Deputy. I believe taxes should be low, simple and fair. That goes for workers and companies. I am not sure if the Deputy believes taxes should be low, simple and fair. Perhaps simple and fair but not low. I believe that should apply to companies and workers alike. I hope that when it comes to budget day the Deputy will vote in favour of tax indexation, for example, where we raise the credits and bands so that people are protected from the effect of inflation on their pay packets.

Our position is one of defending our national interest. Some 250,000 people work in multinational companies in Ireland and that spins off another 100,000 jobs or so. That is 350,000 jobs. We want to retain those jobs in Ireland and we want more of them all over the country. We also want to protect our revenue base. We take in between €10 billion and €12 billion a year in corporation profit tax, double what the average European country does on a per head basis, precisely because we have a low tax rate. In the modern world that we live in, labour, capital, investment and money - all those things - are internationally mobile. If taxes are too high, the companies leave. If taxes are low, they come in. That is why the 12.5% rate has worked so well for Ireland and that it what this is about for us - trying to protect jobs and our revenue stream. The €10 billion or €12 billion we take in every year from corporations is roughly the cost of running our entire education system. It is that large an amount of money and we want to retain that coming in.

I know this can be characterised in a very simple way as corporations not paying their fair share of tax. They should pay their fair share of tax, whether it is here or somewhere else, but, in reality, these negotiations have been about other things. They have been about larger countries trying to get a bigger share of the pie and taking that share of the pie from us. It has not been about ensuring that countries in the developing world get a fairer share of the taxation; it has been about big and wealthy countries that think we are getting too much and want to take some of that off us. That is what we have to protect and push back against.

Those are scare tactics in order to justify the pitifully low levels of tax these corporations are asked to pay. As even the US Chamber of Commerce and representatives of many of these multinationals have said, the reason they are here is not primarily or exclusively the tax rate.

It is to do with the fact that we are an English-speaking country, we are within the European market, we have an educated workforce, and we used to have - not now, because of the lack of public investment - a decent water infrastructure and a proper energy infrastructure. The Government would be doing far better collecting some taxes off these corporations at a reasonable rate, comparable with what ordinary workers pay, in order to fund the investment in education, higher education, water and energy infrastructure and all of the things that can sustain investment and develop the economy in the mean time.

However, what I asked the Tánaiste was how he thinks it is justified to try to minimise international efforts to make these corporations to pay a little bit more tax. He has put huge energy into that but he thinks it is okay to whack a carbon tax on the elderly, sick and vulnerable, some of whom will suffer needless death this winter because of the cold and because of the energy price hikes and carbon tax, and he thinks it is okay that ordinary workers in this country pay three times the proportion of their incomes in taxes that these corporations pay.

The reality of these negotiations, and I have been following them closely for a long time now, is not how the Deputy has presented them or sees them. Large and wealthy countries are looking for more revenue and they want to take it from smaller countries like ours. In the negotiations, the UK made sure that the City of London was protected and would not see some of these applications applied to it. Some of these countries had their research and development tax credit system protected.

They have a 19% rate.

The US ensured that the EU dropped its digital tax proposals. That is the reality of what has been happening. As a small country that relies a lot on multinational investment, we had to protect our interests and seek guarantees and protections. We did exactly that. It is what any right-thinking Government should do.

I agree with the Deputy on one point. The offering from multinationals is, and always has been, about more than tax. It is about talent, infrastructure, and access to the European Single Market and the eurozone, to which I believe the Deputy is opposed. It is about commitment to free trade, which I believe the Deputy also is opposed to. Let us not forget one thing-----

Fair trade.

The estimate not from me, but from the Department of Finance, is that increasing corporation profit tax in Ireland will result in a reduction in revenues. That is because investment, capital and wealth are mobile in the international world that we live in.

Where are they going to go?