Pearse Doherty (Donegal South West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Assumptions are very dangerous and I would not assume anything in relation to the rates. The Minister knows that on Committee Stage we pointed out that his own party colleagues - Deputy Rabbitte's party colleagues - believed a larger tax take should be for future discoveries and licences that have been granted from now on. Let us make that clear. This was a very modest amendment.

Going back to the core of this and forgetting about all of the other side issues which are important in terms of whether it is State oil or not for profit, we are dealing with a specific issue. The point I was trying to get to is that relying on a report from the Oireachtas all-party committee which says the licences and tax regimes should not be changed retrospectively and then dismissing the rest of it is not good enough. The Minister relies on that one line but refuses to introduce the other tax increases that the committee suggested. He then relies on a consultancy report which says the same thing. Where is the other evidence of reputational damage? What has our closest neighbour done, for example, in terms of the PRT? Has it not increased it year on year for the last number of years up to 2013? Has there been reputational damage as a result of that for Britain? What about other countries that went a lot further and renegotiated the contract? Maybe the Minister will enlighten me. I have never seen the contract, but when these oil and gas contracts enter into Deputy Rabbitte's former offices in Government Buildings, do they sign a contract with the Government saying it will not increase the tax rate from then on? It is not about changing the contract on them, it is a matter of changing the rate of tax. I presume that when someone opens a business, there will always be a concern that taxes may go up or down. It is one of the risks one takes. We talked about the great sell off which many people believed was treason. A lot of other words could be mentioned, but they would probably be ruled out of order by the Chair. In relation to this, were side deals done with a nod and a wink to say the Government would never raise taxes on finds entered into before 2014? Is that what the Minister is telling us? It does not make sense.

If the Minister was saying that what I was putting forward would result in the loss of revenue to the State, I would say the ideological issue is that these major companies have made serious gas finds and got away with unbelievable things in the deals they entered into as a result of the previous Fianna Fáil Administration. Outside of trying to rectify that, I would not put this forward if I believed it was going to result in less tax for the State. However, if the Minister relies on saying it would cause reputational damage, I want to see the case study on that. How does it compare to other countries which actually changed the rates? Did they suffer reputational damage or is this just a cop out by the Government? Is it a question of the Government saying "Ah, we will say it will cause reputational damage and let Shell and whoever else has made finds off with the lowest rates and the best deal in the world". It is unbelievable. I am not convinced on this and will press the amendment.

See this speech in context