Joanna Tuffy (Dublin Mid West, Labour)

When the Government tinkered with stamp duty before the predicted consequences did not happen. What was said would happen did not transpire; very often the opposite effect was seen in the property market.

We are being given very little information as to the reasoning of the Government in this respect and it would have been much more helpful, for example, had we been given a table with the old stamp duty rates being compared to the proposed rates. I note, for example, that, on page 33, 2% is substituted for 9%. Will the Minister clarify what the 9% figure comprised? Why is 2% being substituted? I have a vague idea what may be the reason but perhaps the Minister will clarify. The point needs to be made that whatever were the wrongs of the previous stamp duty regime, it did not cause the property bubble. The fact that we were getting so much money from stamp duty may have made the Exchequer too reliant on the property bubble but stamp duty of itself did not cause the bubble. One point about the old regime was that people were differentiated. First-time buyers were differentiated from investors. That seems to have gone now and everybody is to be treated the same way. We may want to get the property market moving again but we do not want to encourage and help vulture investors to come here and buy property on the cheap. Will the Minister explain what the 9% charge was so that we may be sure about what we are doing?

See this speech in context