Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Since Deputy Lawless raised this matter here last year, the Department of Finance has examined it. I wish to outline the various reasons offered to me as to why I should not accept the Deputy's amendment and to have a dialogue with him about it. The first point, which the Deputy has acknowledged in his contribution, is that the tax relief already available to anybody who purchases a commuter ticket is already very significant. The taxsaver scheme was put in place to incentivise the purchase of tickets and it represents a very good investment on behalf of the State.

One reason the existing scheme has been so robust over recent years is because it is very transparent. By that, I mean that the providers of the tickets against which the tax relief can be claimed are all named in the primary legislation. At the start of the year, one knows the cost of the tickets against which the relief may be drawn. There also are conditions in place concerning providers or in other words, they are required to be regulated. We must ensure that any service provider providing a ticket against which relief can be obtained is regulated. A crucial challenge we would face in implementing the Deputy's proposal is that parking facilities are provided by a multitude of providers. Parking exists in different formats. For example, there are multi-storey facilities in some areas and single-storey facilities in others. In others, parking may be in premises that are not used for anything else. The charging is not set by or influenced by the State and can vary in many ways.

Moreover, there is a concern that were the scheme extended in the way proposed, it could have the unintended consequence of increasing the distance driven by commuters before they switch to public transport. I have listened to the Deputy's contribution, however, and I believe he makes a fair point in that gaining access to a public transport facility in many counties requires the use of the car in the first instance. While we are making strides to ensure there are public transport routes and options available to get people to a train station, for example, I acknowledge this is not possible at present for many commuters. That is one reason there has been such investment in upgrading parking facilities in many counties, including the Deputy's, that are right beside public transport routes, particularly train routes.

I am advised that there could well be difficulties in minimising opportunities for misuse. Let me give one concrete example. These are the factors we need to consider when introducing any form of tax relief. We could grant tax relief against the ticket but, of course, we could not have a guarantee regarding who might be using it. Different people may use it. It may be provided for an organisation or a company and different people might use it, despite the fact that tax relief is granted against the ticket itself.

For all these reasons, I regret I am not in a position to accept the Deputy's amendment. It was considered. I have outlined my reasons for not accepting it. I do not know whether the Deputy is aware that one can purchase a parking pass, at a reduced rate, on the taxsaver website when availing of the benefits we are debating. Perhaps this can be attributed to the debate we had here last year and the fact that the Deputy has been raising this matter. Perhaps the issue the Deputy is raising here is being dealt with in another way. We are giving those individuals who make a purchase on the website the opportunity to purchase at a reduced rate access to parking facilities that may well allow them to use the public transport. The tax relief and the reduction in the cost of parking for those who make a purchase on the taxsaver website demonstrate an intention to provide the relief in a different way.

I hope that the Deputy can see that, over the past year, we have considered the matter and have tried to make progress in a different way. For the reasons I have outlined, I am not in a position to accept his amendment.

See this speech in context