Pat Casey (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Acting Chairman. I welcome the Minister. Having sat on the council and gone through a few budgetary processes, including the LPT, I have waited for this opportunity for a good few years.

I welcome the address of the inequality I believe has existed in the LPT process, where more than 100,000 houses have not been liable to pay the LPT tax since 2013. Having gone through a number of those budgetary meetings, that income would have been very helpful to balance the books at the time. I welcome, therefore, that decision to bring them back into the net.

A number of speakers mentioned previously how we try to retain as much of that as possible within the local authority level. The baseline figure has been mentioned to the Minister on a number of occasions. Equally, it is the self-funding element by the Department. I know these are not directly within the Minister's control but these two elements are flexible within the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage. The actual value one gets out of the increase is diminished significantly.

I will move on to the definition mentioned by Deputy Tóibín because it has been raised with me on a number of occasions. The heads of the Bill refer to associated building structures such as sheds, and gardens and any adjoining outdoor area up to one acre. I understand the acre. The Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 refers to "his or her own occupation and enjoyment with that residence as its garden or grounds up to an area ... [of] one acre."

What people in rural areas are probably slightly concerned about is that sheds of no value are now included in the property valuation. I can understand if we are talking about a sauna, gym, or in some cases, even swimming pools that are included in the valuation of the property, once it is within one acre. It then comes to outhouses that serve no purpose only storage, however. As Deputy Tóibín mentioned and as has been raised with me, an element of clarification is needed around that.

The payment of property tax for local authority housing and long-term leasing housing is like an in and out accounting exercise. It does not serve any purpose. I cannot refer to what happens in every local authority but some local authorities take that payment out of the housing budget and redistribute it to fund other departments rather than housing. While it is an in and out accounting exercise I would prefer if that money were to stay in the housing budget. That is just an observation.

I find the lack of the alignment of the local property tax since its introduction with the local authority budgetary process frustrating. That is political and there is no point in saying otherwise. Deputy Matthews mentioned it. It is the people and the councillors who take the tough decisions. The people who do not believe in the local property tax, who will not vote on it, who will not increase it or decrease it and who want nothing to do with it are the first in line when it comes to the budgetary process to try to spend that money on foot of the councillors' decision on the local property tax process.

There is a need for the alignment of the local property tax decision and budget decision on the one day. We have been given reasons as to why that does not happen. We have been told Revenue needs those figures in September or October and the budget is not decided until November. If anything can be done to align the budget process with the local property tax process that should be done as it is needed. It accounts for nearly 30% of the income revenue of the local authority in Wicklow. It needs to be aligned with the budgetary process to ensure the people who are not willing to take the hard decisions are now there to decide where it is to be spent.

I acknowledge that self-financing funding and the baseline are the responsibility of the Minister, Deputy O'Brien but this is a critical issue for counties such as Wicklow and it is hampering what they can deliver at a local level. Anything the Minister can do to influence the baseline, which has not been reviewed for a number of years, would be helpful. The other term now being used is the "self- funding" element. Suddenly local authorities are self-funding something they never funded because the Department wants to keep the money or it does not want to give it to the councils to spend.

Deputy Matthews raised the equalisation fund in terms of getting an understanding of where the property tax comes from within each county. A member of my local authority raises this issue on an annual basis. With the original equalisation fund the richer counties would have helped subsidise the poorer countries. I have some reservations when we get into this level of detail. One area of Wicklow would be a significant revenue generator of property tax but that property tax is needed for the poorer areas of the county. While I have some sympathy with respect to the equalisation fund I would not like it to come down to a local level where one part of a country could ring-fence its fund for its own use. Those are a few observations.