John Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for giving me an opportunity to raise this issue in the presence of the Minister of State. Finglas village is on its knees. It has two large retail centres on its outskirts, one to the north of the village and one to the south. There are many vacant units in Finglas village centre, which is struggling to compete with the two out-of-town centres I have mentioned. Along with my Labour Party colleague, Councillor John Redmond, I have been fighting to protect the village by keeping the post office open and opposing inappropriate developments such as arcades and slot-machine venues. We also have been considering ways to revitalise the village. The local tidy towns committee and the Friends of Finglas Village group are doing Trojan work in their own time to support ways of ensuring the village remains a vibrant place. Finglas is just one of many villages and towns in Ireland that have multiple vacant units. This problem is replicated throughout the country where local communities are contending with the challenges posed by out-of-town centres, which are able to grab more attention.

In the short time available to me, I will speak about the idea of adjusting commercial rates to support retail centres in towns and villages. I appreciate that valuation and planning issues arise in this context. I believe rates should be aligned to incentivise development in core areas; this would be in keeping with the planning guidelines. I also believe it is worth considering the temporary imposition of a large retail levy on massive out-of-town developments. Both of these measures could strengthen local government and increase accountability. With some exceptions, rates are currently applied evenly regardless of the location of the business. While councils have made huge efforts in recent years to reduce rates, this approach is indiscriminate of factors affecting retailers such as accessibility and the amount of parking that is available. Businesses create their own effects. Large out-of-town retailers draw customers from town centres. This was not really an issue during the good times.

However, many of the existing out-of-town developments were built at a time when we had a fast-growing economy and the pie was getting bigger. In the far more competitive economy of today, the advantages the larger out-of-town retailers enjoy have multiplied even more. These competitive advantages are directly impacting on towns such as Finglas, Naas and Ballinrobe, to give just three examples. The knock-on effect is that this is threatening jobs and undermining our planning policies.

I believe councils should set their own rates according to location, giving reduced rates to those in core areas and setting increased rates for outer areas. While it would be up to each council to do this based on local circumstances, I believe it is workable and cost neutral. Consideration could also be given to putting a levy on very large shopping centres in out-of-town locations. For example, in Northern Ireland a three-year large retail levy was introduced on big out-of-town retailers. This levy could be used in conjunction with a revised rates scheme or a stand-alone levy, both of which are worthy of consideration.

This principle has already been established within the new development contribution guidelines, which require local authorities to apply lower contribution charges for developments in town centres and higher ones for out-of-town centres. Furthermore, the Putting People First local government reform document will allow councils to adjust local property tax in certain areas. With a differential rates scheme, which is what I am proposing today, councils and councillors would be able to set commercial rates in their own areas and align them to a policy that would be in alignment with planning policy, thereby enhancing local government reform.

In a nutshell, the current planning guidelines state that towns and villages are at the core of our retail objectives yet our rates scheme does not represent this in any way. We provide the same rates scheme to large out-of-town retailers as to those who are within our planning guidelines in towns and villages. If we really want to promote and enshrine our planning guidelines, which state that locations such as Finglas village or Naas are key retail centres, we must have our rates scheme reflect that. At present, it does not do so. I welcome that our development contribution guidelines have changed to match our planning guidelines. The only piece that is missing in the cake in terms of changing the regulations to be in accordance with our planning guidelines is our differential rates.

If we truly want to bring lifeblood and activity into towns and villages which are genuinely struggling, we need to change our rates scheme to reflect that. The reality is that those retailers which are out of town are in a position to pay higher rates given they have huge car parking space and customers go to these centres for a variety of reasons. If we genuinely care about our towns and villages, we must have some sort of a differential rates scheme which reflects this.

While these large out-of-town retailers of course supply jobs, the businesses in our towns and villages do the same. The big difference is that the majority of retailers in our towns and villages are businesses owned by local people, providing local jobs and buying local produce, which is then sold on further. I hope the Minister of State will take on board my suggestions. While I am conscious it is not his direct departmental responsibility, I look forward to his response.

See this speech in context