Gerald Nash (Louth, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As well as that, there is no single panacea for addressing the housing shortage we have. We are well aware of the labour shortages we have in this country in terms of even meeting the Government's own modest targets in housing delivery. This is certainly key to unlocking Ireland's potential to house those who need homes and enabling us to reach our economic potential. I hope there are no more delays on the introduction of this tax. I think it was introduced for good reason. It was a sound policy rationale, and there is a sound policy rationale for it.

Deputy Conway-Walsh referenced the question of inheritance tax. Rarely have so many column inches been dedicated to a question that is, in my view, a micro-issue. It is very much a minority sport, if we can describe it as such, that affects a small number of people. From an equity point of view, the principle of inheritance tax is important. I said to the Minister in the Chamber, on his appointment, that his generation especially is made up of those who are going without housing. There is a question of social equity and of solidarity between generations. Although I was not here to hear Deputy Conway-Walsh's remarks to the Nevin institute earlier, they did say that we have an economy of winners and losers, and it is socially destructive. The social fabric of our country is being undermined by the lack of availability of affordable housing for young workers. It is a real issue that I know the Minister accepts and understands. It seems to me that he is intending to introduce changes in the budget to income tax thresholds in the context of capital acquisitions tax. The ground has been well trailed. It seems we also have plans to amend the standard fund threshold when it comes to pensions. I understand the logic for that, and it has been set out in terms of it keeping pace with wage growth, inflation and so on. There are also other aspects of public policy where we could apply the same logic. If there were to be consistency, we would do that. The Minister responded to me recently through a written parliamentary question, where he and the Department do not appear to be considering, for example, adjustments to the tax threshold of redundancy payments. There has not been any change to that in years. The Minister for enterprise responded to me recently stating that the cap on statutory redundancy is €600 per week, based on what the average wage was 20 years ago. That was the last time it was reviewed. The average wage is now much closer to €1,000 and the statutory cap has not been changed. There is room for adjustments there for it to be consistent. If the logic is accepted that inheritance tax thresholds need to be changed because of the increase in property values, then to apply the same logic consistently adjustments would be made in other areas of public policy as well. We are, for example, set fair to continue to adjust income tax rates, bands, credits, the USC and so on, to take into account wage growth. I absolutely understand that principle and I accept it to a large degree. However, we are nowhere near the indexation of social welfare rates. If we were to have one on the basis of social equity, the argument would be that we should move towards the minimum accepted standard of living metrics that civil society groups would generally accept as being the right thing to do. It seems we are nowhere close to that. There are a lot of questions and observations there, but in terms of consistency, is the Minister actively considering adjusting the thresholds for inheritance tax? Would he then accept the logic of my argument that if he were to do that, and, for example, change thresholds in terms of the standard fund threshold, other areas of public policy should follow?