Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I recall that the Deputy raised this issue during the Second Stage debate.

He is suggesting that the living part of the initiative is at risk of being diluted in some way. His amendment appears to have been designed to reinstate this element as well as deleting the requirement that claimants, under the commercial element of the initiative, must provide certain information to Revenue before a claim can be made.

Far from diluting the residential element of this initiative, the scheme is now being extended to single storey pre-1915 dwellings and we are no longer only talking about Georgian property. Previously, this scheme had only been available to properties of two or more storeys. There will be more residential properties that will fall within the ambit of this scheme. The element of this scheme, about which Deputy Doherty has a concern, is only a minor part of the scheme itself. There is a residential element for owners and occupiers and, apart from the extension to single-storey dwelling, this has remained the same from the beginning.

Separately, there is a commercial element, which complements but stands apart from the residential part. I want to make it clear that this has always been part of the scheme from the beginning. This is not a new element. There was a small area of overlap, which applied when a commercial operation was intended to be located in what was originally a Georgian house. It could only occupy the ground or basement floors with residential owner-occupier relief being claimed on the upper storeys. The proprietor of the commercial premises did not have to live above the shop. It could be somebody else.

There are good reasons the Minister is proposing to change this: first, the introduction of single-storey buildings into the scheme will have made that restriction irrelevant in many cases; second, with the benefit of hindsight, the Minister concluded that the restriction is an unnecessary complication which will have little or no effect on the scheme as there has always been a commercial element to the scheme; and, third, the aid limit on the commercial element of the scheme, introduced in the Finance Bill, will ensure that the initiative will not result in large-scale commercial developments. This is not about allowing for a large-scale commercial benefit. It is about trying to bring life back into the cities.

The types of commercial developments which the Minister, Deputy Noonan, had envisaged operating in these special regeneration areas are small retail operations and other small-scale local services. These elements work together. In the long term, it will not be possible to have one without the other. People will not move back to live in these city centre locations if the local services are absent and retail activity will not be sustained in the absence of a vibrant resident community - both need each other.

The second element of Deputy Doherty's amendment proposes to remove the requirement for prospective claimants to provide certain details to Revenue in advance of a claim being made. This information will be used to measure how successful the initiative has been, how many residences have been refurbished, and how many commercial operations have been set up as well as ongoing Exchequer costs. Information gathering, as the Deputy will appreciate, is increasingly a feature of EU state aid rule compliance, and it cannot be ruled out that the EU will require detailed information about the operation of this initiative in the future. Obviously, we are eager to ensure we get that state aid approval. The provision of this information will also enable Revenue to better supply data in answer to parliamentary questions on the cost and take up of this initiative which is important in terms of accountability to this House.

In summary, and for the reasons I have outlined, the Minister is not in favour of those proposals.