Pearse Doherty (Donegal, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Gabhaim buíochas leis an gCathaoirleach Gníomhach agus táim buíoch díot freisin an deis a bheith agam labhairt ar an mBille seo inniu sa Dáil. Mar a dúirt an tAire féin, tá súil agam gurbh é seo an t-am deireanach a bheimid ag déileáil le reachtaíocht ó thaobh Covid-19 agus an gá a bhí ann le reachtaíocht sciobtha a thabhairt isteach le dhá bhliain anuas agus go bhfuilimid anois ar an taobh eile de. Den mhórchuid, tá súil agam gurbh é seo an píosa reachtaíochta deireanach a bheimid ag déileáil leis ach caithfimid fanacht faichilleach mar níl dabht ar bith go bhfuil Covid-19 go fóill sa phobal agus níl a fhios ag aon duine cén dóigh ar féidir leis an víreas seo a spré féin agus an dóigh a thiocfadh leis teacht go dtí cineál de mutation eile amach anseo. Caithfimid a bheith faichilleach ansin.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this financial legislation, which deals with the coronavirus pandemic. As the Minister said, we hope this is the last legislation on Covid-19 the House will deal with but we have to remain on our guard in respect of this because we know the virus is still in our community and in our midst. We cannot, therefore, accurately predict the mutation of the virus in the time ahead. Like all Members, I live in hope.

The Bill, in the main, provides for the Covid-19 financial measures that were put in place by the House and the Government following the outbreak of the Omicron variant. I will briefly address each of the measures, all of which Sinn Féin supported at the time and still supports now that they are being codified in legislation.

First, the Bill provides for the reopening of the employment wage subsidy scheme for businesses which would otherwise not have had access to the scheme at that time as they would not have been eligible and that such businesses can continue to be supported until the scheme expires. The legislation also provides certain businesses which are no longer eligible to reapply from 1 January of this year, a measure we proposed and supported. The Bill also provides for businesses that were directly impacted by public health measures introduced in December in response to the variant, such as the 8 p.m. closing time and the 50% capacity restriction, to be able to avail of enhanced rates for the month of February, with a more gradual and tapered step-down out of the scheme. Again, that is a measure we welcome.

Second, the Bill provides for changes to the Covid restrictions support scheme, whereby the turnover reduction criterion was raised from 25% to 40%. Newer businesses which were set up from October 2020 could also avail of the scheme, together with the inclusion of certain charities and organisations. It is important to acknowledge that under such schemes, the State provided crucial liquidity and support, without which we would have potentially entered a recession and would have definitely experienced a significant wave of job losses, most likely permanent. These schemes were necessary to save jobs and that is why such schemes were introduced by virtually all advanced economies. I note that such measures were not possible for many of the developing nations. Again, this reveals the cost of global inequality, with poor nations exiting the pandemic in a more fragile condition than they had entered it. As a nation, we must address this in the future.

Domestically, the EWSS provided support of over €7.6 billion. This is a huge figure when put into context and none of us thought it would be so high when we were dealing with the relevant legislation in those early days. The scheme supported 50,000 employers and 720,000 employees. In the main, this was money well spent. However, I regret that the necessary checks and balances were not in place to prohibit the excessive passing of public subsidies from taxpayers to shareholders in the form of dividend payments. This is a point I raised with the Minister even before he produced the scheme and it is unfortunate the matter was not dealt with.

Similarly, more than €700 million has been paid to businesses through the CRSS. Again this was vital and supported employment to ensure we were in a position to recover from the pandemic. As I have done on numerous occasions, I again commend Revenue on the swiftness with which it was able to establish this process in a very difficult and challenging time. Like the rest of us, Revenue staff were working under Covid-19 restrictions.

However, time and again, the Revenue Commissioners have shown themselves to be an excellent organisation that is able to respond to the requirements set by this House. I also commend the departmental officials on their work on both schemes. I know a massive effort went into this and I am sure they went beyond the call of duty in making sure that as many jobs, workers and people were supported in as timely a manner as possible.

This shows how agile and responsive the State can be in times of crisis. We must ensure that this agility and responsive State are a permanent feature here, not just something that happens at a time of pandemic when we are all worried about each other's health and safety and, indeed, the impact it has on the economy and on the well-being of society. It showed the capacity of the Revenue Commissioners to get support out to citizens in a speedy and targeted manner. While we are dealing with a finance Bill here, that was not unique to officials in the Department of Finance or the Revenue Commissioners. We also saw it in other Departments, such as the Department of Social Protection, as well as among front-line workers, health staff, hospitals, nursing homes and throughout society, where everybody put their shoulders to the wheel. Unfortunately, given the position today with a war in Ukraine, there is a lot to be asked again of the public as we deal with the consequences of that war, including a huge influx of people who are fleeing the war to our shores and the challenges that will bring.

Returning to the Bill, the tax debt warehousing scheme has been crucial to support the liquidity of businesses, and I welcome the extension of both the repayment dates and the interest-free period. Another measure relating to the pandemic that I must mention is the pandemic special recognition grant. It should be noted that the criteria for a qualifying individual who receives this grant are not included in the Bill but are instead delegated to the Minister for Health. We have been waiting for the details of this payment, including who will receive it and who will not. The criteria governing it have been discussed for many months now. The Government must clarify these details as healthcare workers have been waiting for a long time.

I will briefly talk about the miscellaneous provisions in the legislation, particularly those relating to stamp duty. The Minister knows well my strong views and the strong views of my party on the issue of stamp duty and how it is applied. It is applied at too low a rate. That is not surprising given that the Minister refused to even countenance this for many years until there was a public outcry and he could find nowhere else to hide on the matter. He introduced it at a rate of 10% and excluded apartments completely. That has allowed for the plunder of this city and others by these funds, which are snapping up apartments from under the noses of first-time buyers and renting them at exorbitant cost. Obviously, the Minister has provided sweetheart tax deals that mean they do not have to pay any tax on that rent also. This Bill deals with an exemption from even that low rate of tax. Where, for example, an investment fund bulk-purchases homes and they are subsequently designated cost-rental homes by the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage, the fund will evade the 10% stamp duty surcharge that was introduced last year. There are a number of issues in this regard. First, the Affordable Housing Act 2021 is vague regarding the criteria for being designated a cost rental. There is no minimum period established in that legislation so it does not say whether it is six months, six years or 60 years. It does not say many other things, yet here there is a very clear criterion where the funds can avoid paying that stamp duty at even that low rate, if the Minister, and it is solely the responsibility of the Minister, designates a scheme, a housing estate or, indeed, a number of houses as cost rental.

This legislation is an example, in the month of March, of how we are able to deal with things that were introduced last year. It shows that there is flexibility, and not only flexibility but that where there is a willingness, there is a way to meet the needs of society. It is extremely unfortunate that the Minister has decided not to use that today, but has decided to bring forward a resolution that does not go to the limits of what he could do to reduce the cost of excise on motorists in respect of fuel, petrol and diesel. The Minister has completely ignored the plight of those who are trying to heat their homes, who face a €700 hike in home heating oil, and has decided not to reduce that excise by even 1 cent. That is deeply regrettable and shameful.

See this speech in context