Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Senator for the range of questions. I will deal with the first question, which was on the issue of vacant properties. What the revaluation will lead to is that for the first time homeowners will be asked to declare if a property is vacant and will be asked on the IT portal to register for the tax to declare if a property is vacant and indicate a reason the vacancy is occurring.

This is a significant development for us because this will be the first time our tax authorities will have this kind of information. This has been a subject of debate in this committee previously and one of the challenges that we have had is forming an accurate view regarding the breadth of this as an issue and the cause behind levels of vacancy that are there. This is an issue that, once I have data that is evaluated and robustly collected by the Revenue Commissioners, I plan to consider. I will not be able to do it imminently because we need to have the data first and need to have data that has been collected for taxable purposes, but this is a matter that I will give consideration to once it is available to me.

The Senator raised the operation of the ESM and the conditionality for the precautionary credit lines that could be available. In the most recent funding instrument that the ESM made available, which was the precautionary credit line for dealing with the effects of the pandemic on Europe, no conditionality attached to it. As she will be aware, no country has accessed that credit line either. In the discussion regarding conditionality, it is relevant to note that for the most recent intervention from the ESM there was no conditionality attached.

On the Senator's question regarding the use of precautionary conditioned credit lines in the future and the conditionality that is there, she is correct that this is related to the measurements within the Stability and Growth Pact, but that is because the only fundamental budget architecture currently in place in the treaties of the EU are the provisions of the pact and if the use of a credit line is to make reference to changes in a country's budgetary performance then the only anchor available to the ESM to use under EU treaties is the pact. I do not believe that undermines the debate that is due to begin on the pact. The EU, as the Senator will be aware, can only operate on the basis of law and precedent, and if it decides to make some change in fiscal rules in the future, this would, of course, be recognised by the institutions of the Union in the years to come. That would not undermine the debate that I am sure the Senator is eager to participate in but I believe it is important, at a time in which we could yet face economic and financial challenges because of how uncertain the current environment is, to bring forward the operation of the ESM and its relationship with the Single Resolution Fund by two years. It will not undermine the debate that I am sure the Senator and others will be part of.