Dara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Last Friday, I spent an hour with approximately 30 sixth class pupils in my local school who had spent the week doing a project on sustainable development and climate change. As I listened to Deputies in this Chamber this morning, I wished they were put through the wringer in the same way that I was interrogated last Friday about what we are not doing on climate change. Christine Lagarde of the IMF has said this morning that "we will be toasted, roasted and grilled" if we do not take action in this area. I was toasted, roasted and grilled last Friday for what we are not doing as a political class to get this country ready for climate change. Following Storm Ophelia last Monday week and Storm Brian over the weekend, it is beyond me that people are still denying that this is a problem and hoping it will go away. As Deputy Shortall said this morning, and it is incomprehensible that people are still denying this, we are facing the prospect of up to €600 million in direct fines if we do not get our act together. That would have an effect on all the services Deputies are trying to protect.

Almost ten years ago, a Finance Bill changed the behaviour of Irish people by encouraging them to move to diesel cars. We need to bring in similar measures now to incentivise the use of sustainable cars, including hybrid and electric cars. The provisions in the Bill before the House do not go far enough because people do not have enough trust in the reliability of such cars and this country does not have the necessary charging infrastructure. I accept that the Bill contains measures to encourage employers to give excess electricity. We need to introduce a series of measures that will wake people up to the reality of what we need to do to confront climate change. While such measures will have an upfront cost, that will be minimal in the context of the fines that are coming at us, the costs associated with flood damage and flood relief schemes and everything else relating to climate change that we are facing as an island nation. I have given an example of how a single measure changed behaviour. I suggest that the Minister for Finance should show a similar degree of ambition by introducing measures that will change behaviour in this respect on many fronts. I am not just talking about motoring; I am also talking about the way we build and heat our homes and the way we approach many other areas. I think this Bill fails that test.

The changes that are being made in respect of stamp duty and capital gains tax are being packaged as a housing measure. I fear that some of these changes will add to land hoarding, particularly in advance of the introduction of the vacant site levy. We should consider one proposal in this regard. If people who have owned land for less than four years sell that land to a local authority specifically for local authority housing or an affordable housing scheme, perhaps they should be given some sort of capital gains tax exemption on the basis that the land in question will be used for social and affordable housing. I suggest that this exemption would not apply in circumstances in which the planning permission is not secured, for whatever reason. There is a danger that the capital gains tax exemptions, in particular, will be used and people will not move on land, particularly outside Dublin and the other large urban areas. The housing problem is not confined to our cities; it is a problem all over the country. I suggest that there is potential within this measure to move on lands that local authorities can buy and start building houses on, which is what we need.

On the night of the budget, I challenged the Minister about the stamp duty figure and the revenue figure. I have not yet seen anything that diminishes my doubts about the sustainability of the figures in question.

We have had some extraordinary years. Granted, it is through the type of people one does not want in the market but they handed over the cash for property development and, in particular, in commercial property transactions. The entire budget appears to built on that single figure, but I have not received any assurance that the figure will materialise on the day.

There are changes in agriculture, but they were always there. The existing exemptions have been extended to apply to the new rate. There is a case to be made for that in today's context of sustaining agriculture generally and, more importantly, sustaining family-led agriculture as opposed to company agriculture which is where it appears to be going. Where a farm is being consolidated or where land is being bought to consolidate a farm or make it bigger some type of incentive should be given, as was the case previously. We are pushing our farmers to increase the size of their operations for sustainability and Brexit reasons and we should put money behind encouraging them to do that.

The national planning framework will be debated in the House this week. We will also have the newly revised, bells and whistles capital plan published in December. However, there is very little in this Finance Bill to encourage people to move home or move away from the cities and work in the regions. Yes, we must resolve the broadband situation and get broadband into homes to give people the technological capacity to work at home, but we should be incentivising companies to encourage people to work from rural areas. We should give companies some type of break with PRSI if they can give their employees the technical skills and equipment to base themselves in a rural area and work there. The technology is available to do it. What is needed is the encouragement. People will sign up for that. The Minister of State, Deputy D'Arcy, is from a rural constituency and he knows that people make the trip to the city on a Sunday night or Monday morning against the will of every bone in their bodies. They know they can do as I have suggested but they cannot because we have not sorted out the broadband or given encouragement to companies to do it. In terms of sustaining regional life and, in particular, family life it is something we should consider.

There is a need for a comprehensive review of incentives. Dublin city is doing relatively well. We had the debate on the 9% VAT rate for tourism, restaurants and so forth. Other areas of the country are not doing well. It is time we had a debate on using tax policy to incentivise specific regional areas. Instead of shaking one's head and saying it cannot be done we should be told why it cannot be done. This is a small island but there are precedents all over Europe for city taxes and industrial taxes. If we do not use tax policy to move economic investment around there will be very little enhancement.

Finally, it was said earlier that this country is a tax haven, in the megaphone politics being used in the Chamber. It is not a tax haven. While the speakers were saying that the country is a tax haven they were also seeking more investment in services. Approximately 350,000 people work in multinational companies in this country. If they were gone, we would have a serious problem trying to meet our obligations for services in health, education and elsewhere. The people who use the phrase "tax haven" and slam our tax policy then demand investment in services, but they do not add it up or make the connection between the two. Throwing terms such as "tax haven" around in the Oireachtas is completely out of order. It is unfair and does not reflect the reality. We have a very successful industrial base. Tax is only one reason for that. More importantly, it is based on the quality of our workforce, our education system and the ability of our workforce to respond.

See this speech in context