Cian O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

The Minister of State said in his opening response that what is proposed in these amendments is too broad. However, I specifically raised the issue of offshore owners who cannot be contacted. The wording is:

...shall include the following:

(a) legal representative, professional, or management firms or individuals managing or responsible for the property registered in an offshore company;

This often arises for land, buildings and protected structures. It is simply that an offshore entity owns the property, often it is based in one of the tax haven islands, and it can be hard to trace an owner. However, if any planning applications have been lodged or work done on behalf of the owner, there are legal representatives or professional or management firms or individuals who can be contacted. This wording would mean that where an owner is hiding in some kind of offshore entity, often based on a tax haven island, that enforcement notices could be served, at least where they relate to protected structures, on the professionals working on behalf of that offshore entity. The Minister of State says the amendment is not required. However, it is required because there are times when these offshore entities cannot be contacted and nothing happens. The only option would be for the local authority to step in itself but, as the Minister of State is aware, it often will not do so because of the cost. As it will only do so in the more extreme situations, surely that wording the Minster of State said is not required, absolutely is required. If the offshore entity can be contacted, there is no need to go to the legal and other professional representatives, but if it cannot be traced or contacted, it gives the local authority and enforcement authority other options. What is the downside of the wording I am proposing? The Minister of State said it is too broad and not required. I say it absolutely is required and is not broad but, rather, on the button.