Seymour Crawford (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)

I wish to share my time with Deputy Deenihan.

I want to comment on an issue Deputy Devins raised about medical cards. I welcome any increase in the number of medical cards, but one must remember that during the last election campaign 200,000 additional medical cards were promised and there were no restrictions on how they would be allocated. A somewhat different card has now been introduced. This is something Fine Gael proposed as an interim solution to try to ease the pressure on families.

One must remember that 100,000 medical cards have already been taken from people. In the past seven years, more than 8,000 medical cards have been taken from low income earners in my constituency. Cork city and county, which has a population of 500,000, lost a similar number of medical cards. The number of medical cards lost in my constituency is significant, which must be taken into account when announcing good news.

I would be less than honest if I did not welcome a number of aspects in the Finance Bill. Older citizens will receive an increase of €14, which is welcome. There is no point being hypocritical. It is an indication of how the country has improved over the past ten or 15 years that we can afford to recognise the problems these people face. We are often reminded across the floor of the House of what the situation was like in 1997. When our former leader was Minister for Finance in the early 1980s, he gave an increase of 25% to old age pensioners because they were so badly looked after at that stage. What these people are receiving is welcome. However, while there are many good aspects in the budget, those who are in need of child care and transport will be asking major questions. I will return to this later.

I want to raise two issues that are very close to the Minister of State's heart and to mine, the first of which is, roll-over tax. Roll-over tax was discontinued two years ago supposedly because of the difficult economic situation that existed at the time. Roll-over tax was available for anyone selling or buying property within a recognised timeframe. I am saying to the Minister of State as a former farm leader — I had a somewhat slighter involvement in a farming organisation — that as we continue to improve our road and rail infrastructure, people are having their property taken from them. Under the CPO, a specific category of people is quantified. If a road is being forced through people's property and their land is being taken from them, I ask that these people be put on a roll-over tax. That may not be possible in this Finance Bill — with sufficient ingenuity it could be done — but surely these people are entitled to be recognised as a special case.

The Minister of State in particular can claim responsibility for the good deal achieved between the IFA and the Government at the time. He will recognise that if it was necessary then, it is more necessary now, since there is a bigger roll-out of these projects. I do not apologise for raising this issue, and I do so because of the bypass around Carrickmacross which was recently opened, with Castleblayney, Monaghan and a couple of towns in Cavan also affected. That serves to highlight the situation throughout the country. I welcome many slight moves in this direction in the Bill.

The legislation provides for stamp duty relief for those who can get agreement to swap land. I am involved in farming long enough to know that the numbers who will be able to come up with such an agreement will be extremely small. I am alarmed at the detailed requirements to be met, as outlined in the Bill, to provide for that. One will have to involve Teagasc and meet all sorts of requirements. Section 115 outlines the requirements in detail. I hope that the requirements outlined can be eased and improved on Committee Stage to give more leeway to provide for practical solutions. I warn the Minister that if the section is left as it is worded, the number of people who will be able to avail of this relief will be extremely small. The ethos of the measure is good but the practicalities of meeting the requirements to avail of the relief are a different matter. I urge that this angle be examined and dealt with in a reasonable and practical way.

There are some changes in the Bill in terms of the manner in which so-called criminals will be dealt with. I refer to those who have not yet paid taxes or who have had money on deposit across the Border. I make no apology for saying that I was annoyed that people who found themselves, through no fault of their own, in this position down through the years, owing to their having a use for investing money across the Border and such like, have had to pay such penalties that applied. Those who are up to €30,000 — the figure was previously €12,500 — in arrears of tax, or whatever one would like to call it, will not have their names published. The interest charged on the arrears will be lowered from approximately 12% to slightly under 10%. I welcome that reduction, but for the information of the public, will the Minister advise us where they could avail of an interest rate of 10% because many people would like to invest at that rate? It is great. Surely these taxes and penalties should be geared towards the criminals rather than the people to whom I referred. I know people who have gone through mental hell over the past year or so. A few of them have apparently invested money in Northern Ireland or somebody may even have invested it for them. It can be shown clearly that they were not doing so for criminal purposes or for any other such purpose. The rate of tax that applied was insignificant, but such investment cost them a great deal of money. I welcome some easing in that situation but I hope this provision will be reviewed. There is a need for discretion to be exercised by those dealing with it.

I mentioned the positive developments for carers and provision for the elderly, but major negativity surrounds provision for this sector in my area for whatever reason. There is a lack of funds to deal with those who must go into nursing homes or into respite care. That is a serious concern. I had a case the other day — which the Minister of State, who comes from a farming background, will understand — involving a middle aged man who had lived with his mother all his life. The mother happened to be the owner of the family home when she got married and the son's late father had all the land. However, the house, the only home the son has, is being used as a means to stop his mother been granted a nursing home subvention. The rules applying to this measure are naïve and impossible. I have another case where a person suffering from Alzheimer's disease held on to 20 acres of land and his family, who are not rich, have to find ways and means to provide for his care. Those sort of rules need to be reviewed.

Some 257 people were in receipt of nursing home subvention in Cavan-Monaghan at the time of the previous general election. That number was to be reduced to 170, but it now stands at 214. However, the means test to qualify for the subvention is much tighter in our area and I dare say in the west than in other areas. I had a case recently where a person was being put into a home in the west because some family members were living there and the person dealing with the case in the home could not believe that he was dealing with the same health service because he had never come across a situation like this previously.

Many promises were made that child care provision would be adequately dealt with, yet Lattin community centre and several others await receipt of grants that were promised years ago.

A Bill to deal with dormant accounts is to be introduced shortly. However, we have discovered an anomaly recently in the Border areas whereby dormant account moneys handed out through the so-called independent group has not reached, to any great extent, any of the Border counties compared with other counties. We have been informed that the community groups in those areas do not understand how to complete the required forms. These groups have been completing forms for grants under the LEADER programme, the programme for peace and reconciliation and a plethora of schemes down through the years. They are told that their forms are crap, but that answer is crap. This funding needs to be reviewed to ensure that all areas get what they are entitled to, no more and no less. The funds that we get from the programme for peace and reconciliation and others are supposed to be additional, and not replacement, funds. I have major objections to that.

See this speech in context