Dr. Miche?l Collins:

The reason it was removed was because it was a tax that did not generate any revenue. That was at least the political argument for it. I think that was an enormous mistake. Obviously, I was in favour of it and was somebody who pushed for its introduction in the first place. In fact, I thought it should be at 90%, but I was willing to live with 80%. The logic was that, in a sense, it is society and local authorities rezoning this land for the use and benefit of society and that the gains should fall to the State. Rather than nationalising it, the taxation system could be used to capture it.

Unfortunately, we went there and we have come back from it. It is a space we should go to again. Clearly, there was a small group of people who did not like it and would prefer to keep the 80% of the gains for themselves. However, there is a very strong case for saying that those benefits should flow to society and be available for society to use. It is a regret that it came in and went out. I sincerely hope it will come back in again.