Pearse Doherty (Donegal, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

That is fine. If landowners do not develop, and if there is residential land in our towns and cities that is undeveloped, then they should pay 10% over three years. They should probably be paying 10% in the first year. We are in the middle of an emergency. This is not the time to be thinking about the poor craturs who are hoarding land in the middle of our towns and cities. This is a time to say, "Use it or we penalise you because you have had enough time." We have been in the middle of a housing emergency for a while.

I am sure the Minister will respond to that but let me put my other questions in the interests of time. They are just technical questions. Chapter 2 concerns zoned serviced residential land and applies to land "solely or primarily for residential use, or "for a mixture of uses, including residential use". We will have a situation where active farm land, which has a mixed-use purpose, will also be zoned for residential use because part of the farm is close to the town centre. How does that work? Is it the case that farmers will have to apply for it to be dezoned and so on? Has there been consideration of the implications of how that will impact on agriculture? If farmers are going to go and get land dezoned to solely agricultural land, is there is a process in place for them? Are there any knock-on impacts on farmers being able to raise loans and so on and so forth in terms of land that will be devalued, even though they are using it for farming?

What happens to land subject to this tax, that is in scope and part of the final map, which is sold during the process, since the tax kicks in after a period? How will the reasonable test outlined under the proposed section 653B(b), which is that the land is serviced or has access to services, operate? My final question on this chapter is about Revenue's ability to engage. I do not have the section in front of me but I am sure the Minister's officials will know it. Revenue has the ability to point out to a local authority a site that was not included in earlier maps. The local authority then has to make that provision in its final map. That is fine if it is the middle of this process, which is that the local authority draws up a draft map, it goes to consultation and landowners are able to write in and make submissions or whatever. For the subsequent map, Revenue, in the middle of that process, can point out a site that was omitted and, therefore, the local authority has to include it in the final map. What if that omission is identified after the final map is published? If I am correct, local authorities have to publish their new maps every five years. Can those be captured within the five-year period?