Paul Gogarty (Dublin Mid West, Independent)

We are waiting to see whether Deputy Fitzmaurice comes in or whether we can use his time allocated in our slot. My colleague tells me we can use the time. Deputy Lawless got to use some of it and I will use some as well, with the permission of the Acting Chair.

This is another chance to talk about the budget overall, although we are looking at the specific measures in the Bill itself. I support the calls by the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council, as I have before, that we need to start tightening up a little bit because we cannot be too dependent on corporate tax receipts. This was done in the context of a giveaway budget last year, so the contrast is quite huge. Even within that overall framework, there was scope to help those with cost-of-living issues. It has been estimated that up to 300,000 households could fall into arrears without the reliefs continuing. As various groups have mentioned, the budget does not adequately address child poverty issues or supports for persons with disabilities. Where would the Minister have got that money? The €250 million in VAT on the sale of apartments would have made a little bit of a dent. I have said it previously and will say it again that I do not think this is going to reduce the price of apartments. The fact that it is coming in for ones that have already started is ludicrous. That said, the enhanced corporation tax deduction for apartment construction expenses makes a little bit of sense. I am trying to take a balanced approach to this.

The tax deduction of 125% for certain apartment construction costs the Minister is introducing to help address viability challenges makes more sense, subject to the cap of €50,000 per apartment. We do not know whether it is going to hit the cost savings of up to €6,250 per unit but it does make a lot more sense than the VAT on the sale of apartments. The fact that it is going up to December 2030 with the relief claimable upon completion, we will see in the round whether that has been any kind of help in pushing prices down.

Another measure I am supportive of, which has been mentioned in the media in terms of lack of take-up, is the living city initiative. It needs to be expanded or turned into something else for the over-the-shop units in rural towns and villages where post offices are closing and banks are moving out. There is a lot of property stock there that could be regenerated. I said earlier in the year that if those on a housing list in any of the four local authorities in Dublin go down the country, they lose their place on the list. If a person could go to a rural town for three to five years and go back on the Dublin list if they did not like it, we might get a few more takers. It is definitely worth looking at.

While we are on the subject of rural areas, I will mention the policy of trying to encourage software companies to spread around the country, which they are resisting. As a result, all the high earners are in Dublin and it is pushing up the prices for the people who grew up there and those on the affordable housing scheme. In areas like software localisation, in particular, we need to tell companies that if they want to bring in people from outside to work, they must do it on our terms and in areas where there is more scope for housing stock to be released.

I also want to support the amendment of the section and the residential development stamp duty refund scheme. Again, I give credit where credit is due. There are a number of other measures I mentioned before. The EVs makes a lot of sense. While I note there is an investment coming for the charging infrastructure, it is simply not sufficient in terms of the main thoroughfares. We are still doing nothing for people in housing estates where they should be able to put a cable under the footpath out onto the public road and charge it at a domestic rate. If people cannot charge their EVs at a domestic rate, any kind of continuation of an EV VAT relief is not going to help in any way, shape or form. I again welcome the 9% VAT rate extended for gas and electricity but am ambivalent about the 9% rate for the hospitality sector because it is hitting the bigger companies as well. It is much too beneficial. I thought the supports for businesses, such as the power-up grants, could have been more targeted, expanded and helped all those businesses in the same way while leaving Ronald McDonald out of the equation.

See this speech in context