Paul Bradford (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Minister of State and the debate on the Finance Bill 2012. It is always one of the interesting set-piece debates in the Oireachtas. A five minute contribution does not allow Members to go into any great detail on the Bill but the Minister of State will hear ideas and suggestions which may not end up in the Bill but which can be reflected on and planned for future inclusion.

We said previously in this House that every Bill which comes before us should be jobs-proofed. In other words, we should ask ourselves if the passage of the Bill results in more people going to work or more people going on to the dole queues. We hope that as a result of the budgetary measures taken by the Minister of State and his Government colleagues, the incentive for people to go to work will be enhanced and the opportunities for employers to create work will be increased. However, the jury is still out on this legislation and it is only with time that we will be able to look back and know what the jobs result is. I certainly hope it will be positive.

Notwithstanding my strong support for the Bill and, in particular, the Government's general economic management policies since its assumption of office last March, I am a little concerned about the VAT increases. It is not rocket science to suggest history clearly shows that from an economic perspective, increased taxation might bring short term gains but in the long-term, it does not create jobs and economic activity. When the Minister, Deputy Noonan, reduced the VAT rate for the tourism sector in what I suppose was called a "mini-budget" last year, it worked and it put people back to work. I appreciate as much as anyone in the House the dreadful economic figures with which the Government must deal. One must balance one's books as best one can and one must then borrow all these billions to achieve the bottom line. Extra taxation was required but the VAT option should always be the last one. It is simple to think up and simple to collect but it does not provide a great incentive for the consumer to spend and when the consumer does not spend, everyone suffers and the dole queues are lengthened. I hope the Minister of State and his officials will revisit the VAT issue at the earliest possible opportunity.

Some of my colleagues mentioned the price of petrol and diesel on the Order of Business today and its impact on agriculture, in particular. It is, of course, as a result of the excise changes which, unfortunately, were necessary in the budget. On budget night, we have the political and legal capacity to introduce a change to the price of petrol and diesel the following morning. It might be a long shot but will the Minister of State consider a reduction in the excise rate on fuel to deliberately try to reduce the price of petrol and diesel for those three or four important summer months for agriculture and for tourism months when we hope people will holiday in Ireland, use their cars to travel around the country and spend whatever few euros they have at home rather than abroad?

Motoring costs are now a huge financial burden on every family. We must move beyond this idea of motoring being a luxury and that it is somehow so damaging to the environment that we must penalise every motorist in the country. Motoring and motorists are necessary to keep our economy moving, if one will excuse the pun. Will the Minister of State consider the idea of a short term reduction in the excise rate on fuel in the three or four summer months to give people an incentive to use their cars to drive to a local restaurant, a local hotel or a local shop to spend whatever few euro they have and to send a message to tourists from abroad who are coming to Ireland with their cars that it is relatively cheaper to drive in Ireland than in the rest of the European Union?

Not surprisingly the House is again debating the household charge, as I am sure is the Minister of State's House. I refer to his political House rather than domestic house as I am sure his domestic household charge bill has already been paid. Over the years, various Government set up commissions on taxation to look at our taxation system. We must all accept that we have to broaden the tax base. I accept that what I said about VAT perhaps negates this argument but we need to broaden the tax base and to have a mature debate on taxation. My colleague, Senator Noone, made a very interesting suggestion on the Order of Business today that every taxpayer should receive a certificate at the end of the year indicating how much tax he or she paid, although we get that by way of our P60 or P21, and where his or her tax moneys were spent, including what percentage was spent on health, education and so on. By educating the public more on how much it costs to run the country, how much taxes come in, how much money goes out and how much we are borrowing, it would help us to have a mature debate on taxation.

I am not sure what the Government is planning in regard to a commission on taxation scenario but it would be healthy and helpful to the democratic process to have a debate on taxation, including on property tax, capital tax, wealth tax, income tax and on every possible tax so that the pros and cons of all those taxation methods could be looked at. We did not need the IMF or the EU but we were too cowardly to recognise that our tax base was not broad enough and that new revenue raising measures would have to be taken on board.

My final point in this inadequate contribution is that we have interesting debates on the budget and on the Finance Bill but then the whole issue disappears for 12 months. For 20 years, the Minister of State's colleague, the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Deputy Bruton, said that we needed a lengthy budgetary debate. It would be great if, even before the summer, we started the debate on next year's budget and on the choices, options and the range of possibilities in regard to taxation and expenditure. It should be more than a one day, a one week or a fortnight debate because it is of such fundamental importance to everybody in this country.

We had a different type of budget this year with the two-day budget with the two Ministers. That was a small step forward but we need a much more expanded budgetary debating process in the Houses, in Government and in the Department, so that all the choices are put on the table and we can see the colour of everybody's money.