Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)

I welcome the Bill, which is a much needed step forward in addressing the needs of 21st century land conveyancing. I regret the introduction in the Bill of one of the most difficult words, "e-conveyancing", I have seen in the English language. It is awkward rather than difficult. I would prefer if we had done without it as it does not flow that well from the tongue.

We should be going further with this legislation. The Minister suggested that we be radical or redundant and, in that vein, I believe we should have mandatory registration of deeds within a particular timeframe and should include a sunset clause. In other words, I believe that every parcel of land in the State should be registered within, perhaps, a ten-year period. If it is not registered in that time, it should revert to the State.

Developers and others experience practical problems on a daily basis in trying to establish title in both inner city and rural areas. In the inner city, many developments are held up by the sheer difficulty of establishing very complex title. It can often take years to tie down who owns a small parcel of land. That small obstacle can hold up significant development. We should consider the introduction of some kind of legislation to ensure that all property is registered by a certain date. This is particularly necessary at a time when we are trying to encourage brownfield development. The docklands area and parts of the inner city which have been in decline for some time need to be developed. We need some kind of radical action to deal with such areas, where it can be difficult to ascertain the nature of the title.

This is also an issue in rural areas, particularly those which have suffered significant depopulation over the last 150 or 200 years. It can be quite difficult to trace the ownership of property if people have emigrated. This problem is found not only in agricultural areas but also in smaller towns and villages where it is not unknown for property to be derelict, under-used or vacant for many years. A great deal could be done to hasten the acquisition of such sites or to put in place some mechanism to enable them to be developed. The identification of the proper owners of lands under the Derelict Sites Acts has been a significant obstacle to the use of such lands. We are all familiar with sites in our constituencies and counties which have sat unused for many years, if not decades. Some kind of short sharp shock is needed if we are to make the best use of such assets. Local authorities, which own some such sites, do not have the best record in property acquisition or development. We need to make a radical change to the registration of title regulations if we are to make progress in this regard.

I am in favour of the introduction of electronic identification of and access to title. The Bill alludes to and provides for the significant amount of great work that is being done in this regard. In countries like Denmark, which offer their citizens a significant level of on-line access to information, it is practically possible to use to Internet to identify land holdings and to ascertain the name in which land is registered. I accept that there are privacy issues in this regard, but I do not think there would be any harm in establishing an easily accessible geographical information system that would allow any person to identify the real owner of any piece of land. Such a system would help us to deal with derelict and problematic sites which have been idle for many years. We could provide for a ten-year lead-in to the full operation of the system to allow people to resolve gently the many boundary disputes which exist. I do not suggest that such disputes can be resolved with a wave of one's hand, but the possibility of an information system being established would concentrate the minds of certain people. For example, it would put pressure on adjoining owners to sort out their property demarcation issues.

This discussion on matters relating to the registration of deeds and title gives us an opportunity to examine the rights of property owners, an issue that has been considered in some detail by the All-Party Committee on the Constitution. One of the difficulties with property rights in this country is that, to the best of my knowledge, they extend all the way to the centre of the earth. That leads to practical problems when land is being purchased and acquired to facilitate major infrastructural projects such as the Dublin Port tunnel and the rail interconnector. We need a practical definition of how far into the earth property rights extend. The problems I have mentioned could be resolved if it were known that such rights extend 10 m or 20 m down into the earth. Nobody would object to a demarcation of rights that would give people the right to have enough soil or earth under their houses to protect them from vibration and structural damage when tunnelling operations or other major infrastructural works take place.

We should not debate this Bill without mentioning the difficulties with commercial leases. The former Deputy, Mr. Alan Shatter — I was about to say the late Mr. Shatter, but he is very much alive and well — introduced a very good Bill relating to property leases. We need to expand on that legislation by making provision for the assignment of leases and updating the provisions relating to the time limits on leases. We should introduce legislation to remove the cobwebs in this regard and to make clear to people the rights they enjoy when they purchase property leases. The intractable issue of ground rent also deserves to be highlighted as part of this debate. Legislation is needed to prevent the continuation of ground rents by another name under the existing law and to clear up the problems which have existed in this regard since this State achieved independence.

We need to address the issue of the taxation of land. The Green Party has proposed a site value tax on land along the lines of similar taxes which have been implemented in other countries. The possibility of introducing such a tax, which has been discussed at great length, was alluded to in a report that was launched yesterday. It is not an easy bullet to bite but some measures need to be taken to provide for greater equity in taxation. I would welcome any move away from a tax on labour to a tax on real assets like land. I accept that the family home would be exempt from any such tax. There should be some kind of taxation on land that is zoned for development but has been lying undeveloped for many years. There should be some form of taxation on second homes. We should consider the possibility of introducing a site value tax for commercial property. Such a tax would concentrate the minds of property owners.

See this speech in context