Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

We are debating this Bill because the Minister for Finance rushed the original legislation through on the last sitting of the Dáil before the Christmas break. The Bill put through then was fundamentally flawed. This amending legislation is also fundamentally flawed. It is a sign of desperation when the ink is barely dry on the original Bill that we are back here amending it when it should be shredded. In the rush to guillotine the debate in December the Minister forgot about exemptions for properties used by charities, those with pyrite-induced damage and those renovated for disabled residents.

The Minister also proposes that local authority housing will be treated at the lowest value of €100,000. Section 7 outlines his attempt to put a positive spin on this exemption which has managed to turn reality into a virtue. Both he and his officials know that valuing local authority houses in the first category is not fair. Apart from some in Dublin, local authority houses in the remaining 25 counties are not worth over €100,000. In Portlaoise, most are valued at an average figure of €60,000. I have even seen ex-local authority houses sold for €22,000 in recent months. The same is true in south Kildare and Offaly.

Revenue will issue guidelines on setting the value of one's house. If I am buying a house off Michael Noonan, he will have it valued using Revenue's guidelines. However, under this amending legislation, he wants the purchaser to let Revenue know if the house is worth more. It is shameful trying to turn one person against another in such a situation where the property has already been valued.

In 11 days time value guideline letters from Revenue will be hitting the floor in many hallways. Last night in Graiguecullen, County Laois I spoke to people with take-home pay of €300 a week and some disabled people in dread of this tax. It was wrong in December and is still wrong today. Sinn Féin will table amendments to knock the rough edges off it, but no amount of amendments can change the fundamental fact that this legislation takes no consideration of one's ability to pay and will impose a 4% or 8% interest rate every year on those who cannot pay it.

The Bill also gives powers to the Department of Social Protection to deduct the tax. However, the Minister for Finance did not look to the Department of Social Protection to poverty proof the Bill before its introduction. Such a study would have had regard to the impact of the Bill on people such as those I have referred to, those on low incomes and those who are struggling. Such a study would have determined whether the effects of the family home tax caused people to be deprived of essential items. It would have been identified in a survey and the key issue is that the exercise has not taken place. I urge the Minister to have regard to such a study or at least to do so before commencing the Bill. I appeal to the Minister in this regard and I put the case to him honestly. I challenge the Minister to have the courage and conviction to carry out that exercise.

Shockingly, this Bill, which amends the property tax, contains no waivers or exemptions and no way out. Those people I referred to are trapped. The millionaire will pay the same as the pauper and the lone parent will pay the same as the millionaire. I strongly advocate exemptions or waivers. The waivers should include people in low-income households, including those on jobseeker's allowance; one-parent families; those on supplementary welfare allowance and family income supplement, which is the lowest social welfare payment in the State at €186 - not even these people are exempt; those on farm assist; old age pensioners and recipients of occupational pensions; and people on the invalidity pension, those on disability allowance and benefit and blind people. None of these groups is exempt. No one is exempt but at a minimum we should exempt these people.

The Minister has gone for the soft option and imposed a tax on homes rather than wealth. He is putting the tax on local authority houses. A person living in such a house does not own it. The Minister is putting a tax on something that does not belong to the person concerned. That is the key point. People in negative equity do not have property; they have a millstone around their necks. By its nature this tax will hurt people on low incomes. I imagine the Minister has met such people. I have met people in recent months who are in a state of trepidation because of the tax.

Last December we gave the Minister choices. We set out alternative proposals for the budget in a document whose theme was making the right choices. We spelt out exactly how the books could be balanced without implementing this home tax. We outlined new tax measures to raise €2.7 billion that would not have affected low and middle-income groups, including a third rate of tax at 48% only on portions of income greater than €100,000. We set out proposals for a wealth tax that would exclude working farm land and the family home up to the value of €1 million. Other exemptions were contained in the proposal. We set out measures including standardising all discretionary tax relief, which would have raised substantial funding, and we proposed a tax on betting. Many people might not like that idea but I would rather see a tax on betting than a tax on the family home of people, including, for example, those who I met last night. If the Minister reflected on our proposals he would conclude that they would a be a good deal fairer. We outlined where savings could be made. Our savings would have brought in €1.044 billion. Sinn Féin does not believe that savings cannot be made but they should be done in a sensible way. We outlined savings throughout the health sector and other parts of the public sector, including a recommendation for the replacement of branded drugs with generic substitutes.

The Government is hiding behind the troika in this case and blaming Fianna Fáil. Naturally, it was Fianna Fáil that conceived the idea of this house tax. The Minister, Deputy Noonan, was not in favour of it when he was in opposition, as previous speakers have noted. Now, the Minister maintains it is part of the agreement with the troika. It was part of the agreement involving the previous Government but the current Government got a new and very significant mandate, which goes right around to this part of the Chamber; that is the extent of the Government's mandate. The Government is setting out to deceive the public by suggesting that it must do this because of the troika. The Government has choices. We recognise some of those choices might not be easy. One cannot pull rabbits out of a hat and I do not intend to pretend as much but there are choices and those choices should be taken.

There is an exemption in section 2 for the disabled. The problem is that the cost of the adaption of a house must be one quarter of the value of the home. Many adaptions have been carried out. I have dealt with cases at constituency level which only cost €4,000 or €5,000. Some works only cost €3,000, for example, those involving the installation of a stair lift. The measure will not get to the people who are affected.

I appeal to the Minister to take into consideration local services, for example, in the county where I live. We pay for all of them already. Refuse collection was privatised in 1985. We pay for it. We pay fire changes and a range of other charges. A range of other services have been completely privatised. That is the difference.

Through this measure the Government will screw low-income households and those who simply cannot pay. I have seen people and the effect this is having on their physical and mental health and it has shaken them. I say as much honestly. This will be evident when the letters come through the letter box. These people know that water charges will come in next year once the local elections are out of the way. The people know what is coming and what is in front of them and it is not fair. I call on the Minister to revisit it.

See this speech in context