Tuesday, 4 October 2022
Defective Concrete Products Levy: Motion [Private Members]
Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source
We have had two banks leave our State. In every debate on the banking sector here, I am always asked what more we can do more banks in to the country.
While I can understand the attraction of levying, does the party not think there is a risk that could also be passed on? Does it not think that our ability to get more banks and more investment into our country to build more homes is not always or could also be affected by the demand and the case that is made for more levies there?
Finally, Sinn Féin called upon the insurers and said that they should be levied. As the party knows, there are levies in place which they already pay. These are the same insurance companies that we want to provide cheaper and more insurance to our State. I am not saying for a moment nor would I ever indicate to the House that these options are not worth consideration and debate but I am saying that those proposals for a bigger and broader levy also pose many other risks. They also affect things that this House wants to make progress on and wants to see change. While I acknowledge, as I have done in debates since budget day, that any measure I bring forward, including ones that are welcomed by Sinn Féin, always have trade-offs and risks.
The greatest danger we face is twofold. First is not to commit the money to those who were affected by mica to make a difference to their homes and lives. The second is to pretend for a moment that we can commit billions of euros and that that will not create trade-offs and decisions that need to be made elsewhere. I look forward to hearing the views on this issue, particularly on the Finance Bill, and the views of the House on the measures that are being brought forward. I go back to where I began. We have a duty to the homeowners, the need to make progress, but we also have a duty to the taxpayers to explain how it will be paid for. Sinn Féin here this evening want us to do and spend more but are always against the way of paying for it.