Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Go raibh maith agat, a Theachta Mathews. It is regrettable that we have so little time to speak on this Bill. Having listened to the debate over the past few hours, I found it interesting to hear the number of Government backbenchers who criticised the legislation and, like Deputy Mathews, made interesting alternative proposals. Even at this late stage the suggestion should be to scrap this Bill and examine alternatives. Sinn Féin has put forward alternatives which would partly involve a tax on properties worth over €750,000 or €1 million if they are viewed as assets. It would be a tax based on wealth. We must consider the fact that the vast majority of rich people in our society have moved their wealth out of property and into other types of asset. We need to move, as other countries have done, to tax wealth, not property, but we must also take account of people's ability to pay, and there is nothing in this Bill that takes account of that. There are 1.8 million people who have only €100 at the end of the month, and that is being eaten into all the time because it does not take account of the changes in the budget this year, the property tax the Minister hopes to impose, water charges, or the changes that will hit not only the 180,000 mortgage holders in distress but those who will be affected by the increase in interest rates. The effect of all of that, particularly for those who are on the breadline and struggling to make ends meet, and especially for local businesses, is that the money will not be there. It is a regressive tax because the Minister is taking money out of the local economy. The Minister might counter that argument by saying this measure will ensure that local government will have the money to provide services, but because the amount of money from the Central Fund that goes to local authorities has been decreasing - and will continue to decrease, because the Minister will use this measure as a justification, saying they have another pot of money - all of that money will not be circulated in the local economy. It will not be used as an addition to money available to the local authority to invest in housing. The local authorities are struggling to deliver services because of the reductions in transfers, not only from the Minister's Government but from previous Governments.

The Minister has an opportunity to re-examine this measure. Molaim don Aire tarraingt siar ag an staid seo. Tá sé i gceist aige mionleasuithe a dhéanamh ar an mBille, ach ní dhéanfaidh siad déileáil leis an bpríomhfhadhb atá sa reachtaíocht seo. Níl an cáin seo cothrom agus ba chóir fáil réidh leis. Caithfear bheith cinnte i gcónaí go bhfuil cáin cothrom. Measaim gurb é an t-aon bhealach chun déileáil le seo ná cáin a chur ar sealúchas agus ar maoin. Tá sé sin curtha chun cinn i ngach ceann de na roghanna cáinaisnéiseacha atá foilsithe agus curtha faoi bhráid an Rialtais againn le blianta anuas, agus muid ag dúriú isteach ar conas is féidir cáin a ghearradh i gceart ar an bpota mór sealúchais atá ann i sochaí na hÉireann.

Ba cheart go mbeimid in ann díriú ar na fadhbanna atá acu siúd nach bhfuil in ann a gcuid morgáistí a íoc nó bia a chur ar an mbord agus féachaint conas is féidir linn cuidiú leo ionas nach mbeidh siad i gcruachás as seo amach. Ní dhéanfaidh an reachtaíocht seo ach cur leis an gcruachás lena bhfuil a lán teaghlaigh sa tír seo ag déileáil, ach go háirithe tar éis na cinnithe a ghlacadh i gcomhthéacs na gcomhráite ar síneadh comhaontú Páirc an Chrócaigh. Impím ar an Aire, fiú ag an staid seo, tarraingt siar ón gcur chuige seo. Níor chruthaigh an Rialtas an bosca atá timpeall orthu. The Government did not create the box but it adopted the one created for it by Fianna Fáil. It has confined itself to that austerity box but it needs to think outside it and look at imaginative solutions. If it continues to go back to the well of the ordinary workers, it will find it is dry, and this will have a negative impact on local economies and on the national economy, as is the case already. However, there is another well that is not being tapped in the proper way. That is the wealth I mentioned which is held in shares, despite the collapse in the value of many shares, in assets, such as gold and paintings, and in some property, which might be tackled here.

This tax will target those on modest incomes. Some people have homes that will be valued over and above their incomes, because they may have inherited them, and they may have no ability to pay. I refer to pensioners and the like. It will also be a double whammy for people who paid huge amounts in stamp duty, particularly those who bought houses after 2000. They were forced to do so because there was never proper regulation of the rental market or proper regulation to ensure similar leases and similar rental systems, as in the rest of Europe. There was under-investment in local authority housing over many years. In many cases, people had to get in over their heads just to put a roof over their heads. This Government and previous Governments benefited from encouraging those people to buy houses for amounts well beyond their means. The banks were guilty of giving mortgages, but that has never been addressed. Those people are struggling, having paid a fortune in taxes, and now the Government is threatening to impose a tax on them.

Some aspects of the legislation are even more draconian. It is suggested that the Revenue Commissioners will be able to make illegal raids on people's bank accounts to recover this tax. That is not even done when companies owe the Revenue Commissioners money. A different approach is taken to ordinary workers and those who are struggling compared to the approach taken to companies that are struggling. The taxes they owe the State are written down and their bank accounts are not raided. I have no problem ensuring people disclose their incomes and what they have in the bank to the Revenue Commissioners but the suggestion is that this can be taken from their bank accounts.

The same goes for people in receipt of social welfare. We passed social welfare legislation which will allow the Department to take up to €27 per week from the basic rate of social welfare if somebody is in arrears or receives an overpayment because of an error on the part of the Department itself. The Minister is suggesting more money can be taken out of that pot without taking into account a person's ability to pay. There is nothing in this legislation which takes account of people's ability to pay, and that is its most fundamental flaw. I urge the Minister to withdraw it, to go back to the drawing board, as has been suggested by others, and to look at the imaginative proposals that would raise the same amount or more in taxes and that would not be a regressive tax in the Irish economy.

See this speech in context