Seán Kyne (Galway West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

It goes without saying that fairness should be at the heart of everything we do in the national Parliament and the Non-Use of Motor Vehicles Bill 2013 will bring fairness to a situation of which most people are aware. The Bill will ensure fairness for those responsible citizens who pay their motor tax by closing a loophole which has enabled a minority to evade their obligations under the law. It is simply unfair that those citizens who do not pay their motor tax or who use the retrospective clause enjoy the use of the road network at the expense of those who pay.

It is estimated that the Exchequer is losing up to €50 million each year, and we must remember this is €50 million less to spend on the maintenance and upkeep of our roads. Figures compiled by the Comptroller and Auditor demonstrate that 1.1 million off the road exemption gaps were declared between 2008 and 2011. This represents a 40% increase and a total loss of €226 million for the State. A significant proportion of the exemptions were of course legitimate and sought by honest and genuine motorists but it is also likely that a significant percentage were sought for the sole purpose of evasion of this tax. Unfortunately, there appears to be some difficulty in determining the exact number of motor tax evasions. A constituent who recently contacted my office on the issue of motor tax quite rightly said technology exists which could play a greater role in enforcement. For example, technology at toll booths could actively assist the Garda in apprehending those who are evading their tax obligations.

In researching this topic, it is noteworthy that many of the changes proposed actually arise from the deliberations of the local government efficiency review group. This group comprised experts from the public and private sectors and carefully reviewed the array of local government areas. It is unfair to say the provisions of this Bill are not based on research and examination or represent a knee-jerk reaction.

However, concerns have been raised with me regarding a number of sections. For example, section 7(13) and (14) empower the Minister to prescribe a fee to accompany an used declaration. I contend that in light of the fact we are already closing a loophole which would prevent tax evasion, we do not impose a charge. I was glad to hear the Minister of State say that the Government does not propose to introduce a fee at this time. Section 14 should be augmented with a new category of fee waivers for vintage vehicles. We must recognise the fundamental difference between cars used daily for all sorts of purposes and those vintage cars kept by enthusiast or hobbyists for recreational or past-time reasons. We must also realise a car originating from as recently as the 1980s can be considered vintage and may be kept, but not used frequently, by citizens. For example, it could be used in the summer months but locked away in storage during the winter months. Some individuals raised this issue in light of this Bill. I appreciate that under the other Acts, a car over 30 years old is classed as vintage but there are cars younger than that which would be liable for full tax if declared for the full year.

Several State agencies and Government Departments are involved in the implementation of the motor tax system, including the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport and the Revenue Commissioners. It is very welcome that section 5 makes provision for the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport to operate the licensing authority but we should go further and transfer the responsibilities for motor tax policy, currently under the remit of the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, to the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport. It would make sense to do this and it would improve the motor tax system.

Some in this House have sought to criticise the transfer of the driving licence function to the Road Safety Authority from the county councils as proof of some campaign against local government. This is not true. Transferring the driving licence function is rooted in road safety. It recognises that on passing a test, a person will be awarded a driving licence for life, so it makes sense that the Road Safety Authority would be central to the driving licence process. Road safety must central from the start of this Bill providing financial arrangements for the transfer from the local authorities to the Road Safety Authority. Nobody likes to pay tax but those who pay want to ensure and need to know that everyone who is liable to pay tax does so and this Bill ensures that in the context of road tax.

See this speech in context