Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)

I thank the Deputies for their contributions to the debate and for facilitating this urgent and immediate emergency legislation. Nobody likes to bring in legislation at such short notice. However, it is designed to protect State assets and the policy context within which the IDA, Shannon Development and Údarás na Gaeltachta operate in terms of the utilisation of these assets and industrial parks and the application of those assets for the benefit of creating jobs.

Deputy Pat Breen raised issues about the case that acted as a catalyst for the publication and formulation of this legislation. I appreciate his assertion that Fine Gael will support the Bill because of its desire to safeguard State assets.

There has been a correct policy of endeavouring to manage estates properly and control the type of developments and investments that take place. This sometimes requires patience because estates are not always developed as quickly as some would like. We have all seen examples of how badly managed industrial parks and estates can turn away investment and make a location unattractive. The IDA has been largely successful in applying this policy in respect of lands within its ownership by placing covenants to secure manufacturing, restricting the land from manufacturing or international traded services. People have, from time to time, questioned and called for a review of the policies, and Deputy Burton alluded to this in her contribution. Notwithstanding the passage of this legislation, those policy issues can still be considered and debated again. This legislation does not preclude such a discussion of the idea of policy in terms of the most effective utilisation of land within IDA ownership.

The IDA has a very active property portfolio. It has been in the business of selling some of its property and creating new, more modern industrial, business and technology parks, which are more fitting and appropriate for the attraction of inward investment. It has always had to do that with the consent of the Minister of the day in accordance with statute and legislation. There is nothing underhand in that kind of exercise or transaction.

In the context of Deputy Burton's contribution, the Attorney General has advised that the section 4 amendment is the most appropriate mechanism to deal with this situation as it has arisen, and that is in the constitutional and legislative context. The Attorney General has advised on this issue and the Office of the Attorney General has been closely involved with both the individual case and with the more general issue that has arisen from that case.

In essence, the purpose of the Bill is to exclude the IDA, Údarás na Gaeltachta and Shannon Development from the operation of the Ground Rents Acts save in the special case of dwelling houses which, in the case of these bodies, is not relevant in any event. This legislative amendment to the Ground Rents Acts would solve for these three bodies the difficulties highlighted in the individual case that has given rise to this legislation. The legislation does not apply to any notice of proceedings under the Ground Rents Acts in existence prior to the enactment of the Bill. I understand that has been an ongoing issue in terms of the abolition of ground rents. It was the previous occupant of the Chair who brought in the far-seeing and progressive Bill in Opposition in 1996 or 1997 to abolish ground rents but my understanding, and it is not within the remit of my Department, is that constitutional issues have been put forward as a barrier to the introduction of legislation that would, in effect, abolish domestic ground rents although I realise there are arguments on both sides of that debate. For the purposes of today's legislation, however, while the opportunity was correctly taken by Deputies to raise that issue we do not propose to deal with it in the context of this legislation.

On the question of local authorities buying land, local authorities are at one remove from the centre. This issue has arisen at Government level and it falls to other Departments to examine their positions in terms of making a risk assessment of their individual property portfolios. In regard to Deputy Ring's suggestion that I would attempt to bring the local authorities within the ambit of this legislation, that would not be appropriate and in any event local authorities have their own legislative template for the disposal of properties. I understand it is the reserved function of elected members to dispose of properties, not just the executive of the county council. On another day that would be construed as an outrageous interference in the democratic rights of elected representatives on councils throughout the country. It is open to councils to put qualifications and restrictions on the use of any land. It is within reasonable parameters and I do not propose to do that.

On the Deputy's wider issue about IDA land in the past being used for different reasons, there was a strong policy in the 1980s of developing advanced factories throughout the country. That policy ceased in more recent times but it has led to the moving on of that property and its utilisation for different purposes. That is the backdrop.

Thirty-five year leases were entered into in the 1980s, some of which were for advance factories. That was a policy decision taken at the time. There is difficulty renting out those factories now as modern industrialists want more flexible, custom built facilities and they do not necessarily believe those advance factories suit their needs and concerns.

In terms of the BMW region generally, the IDA's target is to have 50% of all new greenfield jobs in Objective One regions by 2006. To date it has achieved a 42% target, which is a significant achievement. Addressing a recent conference on the BMW region I received information to the effect that, for the first time in a long time, jobs were created at a faster rate in the BMW region than in the south and the east. It might be argued that people are commuting and so forth. We will also take up the wider issues raised by Deputy Boyle.

I thank Deputies for their contributions. Ministers do not like to bring in urgent legislation such as this but we had to act when the situation was presented to me. Clear decisions had to be taken to protect the State asset and that is what we are doing.

See this speech in context