Mattie McGrath (Tipperary South, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Finian McGrath for sharing his time with me. The issue of rates is and has always been a huge one for the vast array of small businesspeople up and down the country. Rates were on land up to 1977. They were always paid. I suppose it was a retrograde step to take them off fully. Now we have moved on to a whole new situation of business. The boom drove the valuations that were put on businesses mad. Then we had the bust.

However, there has been no connection between the ability of small businesses to pay rates and their turnover. These must be linked in some way.

I am disappointed in the Bill because it does not get to the nub of the matter. Most people whom I know try their best, as do the county officials in the former South Tipperary County Council, which has been amalgamated into the county. Money is banked in Nenagh, but the north Tipperary county manager does a smash-and-grab and takes everything out of south Tipperary. However, that matter is not for today. People who are paying rates in Clonmel, Carrick-on-Suir, Cahir and the smaller villages are being charged for everything, but they are getting no services in return - not a morsel of salt in the frost or snow. There are no council staff on the ground to assist them in any way. Since they have also paid water rates for years, many of them cringe to see the furore over attempts to charge for water. In south County Tipperary, 97% of water rates were collected.

I thank the rent and rate collectors and, above all, the ratepayers who have paid for services for decades. However, many new businesses have had to pay development levies when applying for planning permission. Even though they pay water rates, they must pay for a water connection as well.

I thank the staff of the Valuation Office with whom I deal because they are understanding and helpful, but there are not enough of them and they have too much work to do. As such, I welcome the Bill's section on appointing external individuals to conduct revaluations under strict guidance. People should not have to wait and appeal. The process is expensive, cumbersome and too slow.

Section 2 provides for a new definition and for deletions, substitutions and extensions of existing definitions in the 2001 Act. The section redefines "rating authority" to provide for the revaluation of fisheries. The Bill's ethos is important, but we have not got it right. I am not saying I am an expert, good or bad, and we can look forward to a better economic climate than the one we are in, but people have been struggling and forking out significant amounts of money regardless of turnover or of the ability of self-employed people, including myself, to create jobs and a better environment for their communities through their taxes and the PRSI contributions they make for their employees. There must be some connectivity.

This Bill is timely, but I would prefer if it were not passed at all, and I will vote against it because it is not right in many respects. We should take more time to develop a better understanding. I am not being critical of the staff of the Bills Office or whoever drafts Bills, but I often wonder whether they understand the issues they are dealing with. Why not have a forum in which ratepayers can have an input into the Bill and the system?

I listened with interest to Deputy Wallace's comments on business rates in Dublin, including for his restaurant. He said that even its kitchen area is subject to a high rate because it is deemed a premium market space, being at the front so that customers can see where the food is cooked. Although vital business is being done there, one cannot make sales out of the kitchen. What is produced in the kitchen brings in all the sales, but the area cannot be used for seating.

In the towns that I represent in Tipperary, restaurants want to create a nice ambience for passers-by and get people to stop by putting tables and chairs on the footpaths, but there has been holy war with the council over it. Restaurants are levied straight away and the spaces are measured in square milli-inches. It is punitive and regressive, but the Bill does not address this matter either. Businesses should be encouraged to make their streets friendly for pedestrians so that people might sit and eat when we get the weather. We had a wonderful summer last year. So far, this winter has been good as well. It is lovely to see people sitting outside, eating food and talking with passers-by. A person I have dealt with received a letter from the area engineer or the like claiming that the person had broken the law. This matter should have been examined in the Bill.

Small and medium-sized enterprises, SMEs, are the economy's backbone. During Question Time this morning, the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Deputy Bruton, talked about IDA Ireland and Enterprise Ireland attracting companies to small rural towns. They are not going to those towns because there is no proper connectivity in terms of broadband and so on. We depend on SMEs, the generators of wealth. People have ideas and they source support, which is difficult to do, set up and develop businesses, work all the hours God gives them and try to create jobs and, thereby, wealth and better communities. When their rates bills arrive, though, they are crucified. They cannot pay. I am not saying they will not pay anything, as they want to pay, but there must be a system of instalments. The councils work on that front as best they can, but they need support and a dig-out. A great deal more research should have been done in this amending legislation, given how vital it is.

Section 17 amends the grounds on which an appeal to the tribunal may be made and provides that reference must be made to comparable properties. Where no comparable property exists, the appellant is required to submit a valuation determined by reference to the valuation levels of other properties stated in the valuation list. That is all fine and dandy, but it is not as easy as it says on the tin. What if there is no comparable business? A constituent of mine who was assessed six months or a year ago is in negotiations with the Valuation Office seeking an appeal. He has no industry with which to compare. The nearest comparable business has a much lower valuation than he does. I am concerned by the seeming and deep unfairness of this.

I welcome the fact that the office will get more staff on strict conditions of employment relating to, for example, confidentiality and leaking information. If there are misdemeanours, staff can be dismissed or replaced by other private sector employees under the strict terms and conditions set out in the Bill.

I am disappointed that there was not a more exhaustive examination. I have spoken with the chambers of commerce and small business organisations and held a forum to speak with SMEs, which are at the pin of their collar paying these rates and levies but are getting no supports in return. They paid willingly when they were able, but turnover has vanished in many cases. Others who must leave a place unoccupied must first pay their rates and then use letters of advertisement from auctioneers, for example, to prove that it was unoccupied so that they can get that money back. This is a regressive and unfair system and should be examined in more detail.

See this speech in context