Maurice Quinlivan (Limerick City, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

It is a very important clarification because it was a good initiative. Unfortunately, in Limerick city, one of the biggest, most profitable companies in the country has kept a site vacant for a number of years and refuses to deal with anyone who wants to do anything with it, perhaps because it is worried about competition. Something needs to be done about this. I think the council itself is trying to address the matter. One of the reasons we came up with that rates system was to address vacant sites.

I agree with almost everything Mr. Tom Burke said, apart from his comments on the centralised collection of rates. It is a very good idea but it should be done by local authorities as the housing assistance payment is done. One local authority would be the lead authority. The reason I am opposed to Revenue doing this is that it is another diminution of local government, and it is important we protect what local government has. Obviously, everyone agrees that companies need to know what their bills will be like into the future. The revaluation process has been difficult for new counties, so to speak. It was a bit of a disaster for us in Limerick. We were one of the first to have it done. Seven or eight global companies benefited hugely from it while smaller businesses had to pick up the balance. We were told at the time that when they came in, the revaluation would be cost-neutral. It did not turn out to be cost-neutral. The right of people to appeal was not factored in. Many did appeal, and I myself helped them to appeal. They were successful and that was extra money the local authority missed out on.

I understand the heads of a new rates Bill came before Cabinet in March or April of this year. We do not know the present status of the Bill, so perhaps a member from Fine Gael might tell us if they have any update on it. I will not put them on the spot.

Again, I agree with everything Mr. Burke said apart-----