Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Fleming for the amendment. The primary purpose of this Bill is to accelerate the National Revaluation Programme. There has been much criticism of the pace at which it is proceeding and predictions that it will take until 2013 are predictions that I have heard in various debates in the Dáil. This is not the case and the figures show that the revaluation programme has now gained momentum. In the period between 2005 and 2011, one third of properties revalued to date were completed with the remaining two thirds completed between 2011 and the end of 2014. In the period since 2011, new valuations for almost 32,000 of the 146,000 rateable properties in the country have been published under the National Revaluation Programme. Additionally, the rateable assets of 12 public utilities have been revalued at more than €838 million. In total, some 58% of the entire valuation base in monetary terms has been already revalued. This momentum will be built upon by the measures in the Bill and, while we do not agree on all parts of the Bill, the measures to speed up the process of revaluation are in the interest of everybody looking for a fair valuation system.

I have heard possibly Deputy Fleming, or certainly others within his party, saying that it will take until 2013 to complete the revaluation of the entire country. This amendment aims to put those areas that have benefitted from revaluation onto a three to five year cycle. The impact of this is that those local authorities that have been revalued already will get onto this regular cycle and an increasing amount of limited resources will go on fulfilling this obligation when counties that have yet to be revalued will continue to wait. I do not believe that is fair. Surely we all agree that the first priority of revaluation is to get every local authority revalued for the first time in 150 years. Then we can, and indeed must, aim at lowering the interval between revaluations. In my view it makes no sense to lower the interval at this point. However, once the National Revaluation Programme is complete and the gap between revaluations is closer to five years than ten years I believe it will be vital that we enter the debate on the ideal interval between revaluations. However, the priority for this Bill has to be to get everywhere in the country revalued for the first time in 150 years. The ideal gap between revaluations is closer to five years than ten years. We should continue to keep this issue under scrutiny. The priority for this Bill is to get everywhere in the country revalued first. Therefore I cannot accept the amendment.