Michael Ahern (Cork East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

I regret that the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy McDowell, is unable to be here owing to another commitment but I welcome this opportunity to bring the Registration of Deeds and Title Bill 2004 before the House. The debate and discussions that have already taken place in the Seanad were constructive and helpful and the Minister tabled a number of amendments in response to concerns raised there. He also took the opportunity to insert a new Part in the Bill, Part 2, which provides for establishment of the property registration authority. This new authority will be responsible for the control and management both of the Registry of Deeds and the Land Registry and for promoting registration of title to land. The explanatory memorandum has been updated to take account of the amendments made during the Bill's passage through the Seanad.

On the substance of the Bill, it is beyond doubt that effective and efficient property registration structures and systems are essential requirements for a successful economy. There are several reasons for this. Registration of ownership of land confirms and underpins the owner's rights to use and enjoy that land. For example, it is necessary to be able to demonstrate good title to sell or transfer the land, whether the owner is trading up or down. This is important whether the owner is a private individual or a business enterprise.

Having good title to land allows the owner to make use of the asset to borrow funds which, in the case of a company, may be needed to launch or expand a business enterprise or to diversify into another area of commercial activity. In the case of private individuals, remortgaging a property may be undertaken to extend a family home or to assist a family member to gain a foothold on the property ladder. Looked at from this perspective, it is clear that effective land registration systems have the capacity to contribute in a meaningful way to entrepreneurial and economic activity in the country.

Efficient registration systems, by which I mean systems in which registration procedures are straightforward, delays are avoided and costs are kept to a minimum, also have the capacity to enhance national competitiveness by making the country a more attractive investment location within the international community. In this context, it is interesting that the World Bank has recently drawn attention to the importance of sound property registration systems as a means of improving the climate for business and enhancing business activity.

The main aims of the Bill are to restructure and modernise land registration structures in the State, update and streamline the law relating to registration of deeds and reform the law relating to the registration of title to land. The new property registration authority will be a statutory body with a representative board on the lines of the existing Courts Service. The Minister's intention is that the composition of the new authority will bring stakeholder expertise to bear in the discharge of its functions. This new structure is intended to facilitate stakeholder involvement in the strategic management and modernisation of registry services, provide channels of knowledge of and feedback from the conveyancing and property sectors leading to increased responsiveness to customer needs and ensuring quality customer service, make commercial and business expertise available to the new authority to ensure cost-effectiveness in the provision of services, facilitate staff representation to ensure staff participation in the management of change within the new organisation and increase the visibility and profile of the property registration services.

Part 2 contains provisions relating to establishment of the property registration authority, including its membership, functions and staffing. One of its main functions, apart from managing and controlling the Registry of Deeds and the Land Registry, will be to promote and extend the registration of ownership of land. When the Registration of Title Act 1964 was enacted more than 40 years ago, hopes were high that registration of title in the Land Registry would gradually replace the Registry of Deeds system. Specific provision was made in section 24 of that Act for extending the compulsory registration system on a geographical basis. Subsequently, a 1969 ministerial order extended compulsory registration to counties Carlow, Laois and Meath.

For whatever reason, no further extension of compulsory registration took place until the Minister made an order last September which has the effect of extending compulsory registration to counties Longford, Roscommon and Westmeath with effect from 1 April 2006. The result of inaction over several decades is that the new authority will face a considerable challenge in its task of achieving a decisive shift toward the registration of title system within a reasonable timeframe. This task is urgent for another reason, namely, that the Law Reform Commission has concluded that the comprehensive system of e-conveyancing to which we aspire can only operate in respect of registered land.

The Minister believes the active involvement of all stakeholders, especially conveyancing and business interests, will be crucial to creating a climate which supports progress in this area. He intends in due course to request the new authority to address this particular challenge in its first strategic plan.

Section 9 provides for establishment of the new authority, while section 10 deals with its functions. These include the management and control of the Registry of Deeds and the Land Registry, the promotion and extension of the registration of ownership of land, the processing of applications under Part III of the Landlord and Tenant (Ground Rents)(No. 2) Act 1978 and the undertaking of research projects relating to the registration of land. The authority will also keep the Minister informed of progress on the registration of land and perform any additional functions conferred on it.

Provisions relating to membership of the authority are contained in section 11. The authority will have 11 members, including a chairperson to be appointed by the Minister. Membership will include representatives of the Law Society, Bar Council and the staff of the authority. The section also deals with the resignation or removal of a member from the authority. Section 12 deals with the filling of vacancies, while section 16 deals with meetings of the authority.

Sections 13 to 15, inclusive, are standard provisions for this type of authority. Section 13 deals with membership of the Oireachtas or European Parliament. Section 15 deals with the disclosure of interests by members of the authority under section 14 and non-disclosure of confidential information.

The appointment of specialist advisory committees, advisers or consultants is provided for in section 17. Such appointments can only be made with the approval of the Minister. This section also provides that the authority may engage contractors to provide such services as it considers necessary with the approval of the Minister and the consent of the Minister for Finance.

Section 18 provides for the preparation and submission to the Minister of strategic plans by the authority, while section 19 deals with the making of other reports to the Minister. It is intended that such plans and reports shall be laid before each House of the Oireachtas.

Section 20 provides that the Minister may issue general policy directives to the authority on the registration of deeds or the registration of ownership of land or any other function of the authority. However, nothing in the Act can be construed as enabling the Minister to exercise control or power in specific cases being dealt with by the authority.

The fees to be charged by the authority for its services are provided for in section 21. It provides that the Minister, with the consent of the Minister for Finance, may by order fix the fees to be charged by the authority for its services. It provides that they shall not be fixed at a level which would produce an annual amount less than that required to meet the salaries, remuneration and other expenses of the authority. Fee income shall be paid into the Exchequer.

Section 22 provides for appointment of a chief executive, the delegation of functions and the carrying out of the functions of chief executive in his or her absence. It is intended that the current Registrar of Deeds and Titles will become the first chief executive of the new authority and this is provided for in subsection (9). Section 23 provides that the chief executive shall be the Accounting Officer for the purposes of the Comptroller and Auditor General Acts, while section 24 makes provision for attendance of the chief executive before Oireachtas committees.

The appointment of staff to the authority is dealt with in section 25. Section 26 provides that every person who immediately before the establishment day was a member of the staff of the Land Registry or Registry of Deeds shall become a member of the staff of the authority on that day. Staff shall remain civil servants in the service of the Government.

Section 27 provides for the transfer of land and other property to the authority on establishment day. It also provides that all records and documents held by the Land Registry or Registry of Deeds before establishment day will stand vested in the authority on that day. Sections 28 and 29 are transitional provisions relating to contracts and proceedings pending at establishment day.

Section 30 is also a transitional provision relating to the validity of acts done prior to establishment day on behalf of the Registrar of Deeds and Titles.

Part 3 of the Bill contains new provisions relating to the registration of deeds. The registration of deeds system, operated by the Registry of Deeds, provides for the registration of documents relating to land with a view to establishing priorities between documents dealing with the same piece of land. The act of registering a document does not in itself guarantee title to the land covered by that document. In this important respect, registration of deeds differs fundamentally from the registration of a title which, in effect, registers ownership of the land.

The Registry of Deeds was established under the Registration of Deeds Act (Ireland) 1707 and many of the registry's current practices and procedures are still governed by that Act, and by other antiquated statutes dating from the 18th and 19th centuries. The result is that the registry simply does not have the required margin of operational flexibility to respond adequately to the changed conditions of today. In short, there is now an urgent need to replace the current system with provisions more suited to modern conditions. This requires the outright repeal of the eight old statutes under which the Registry of Deeds still operates and their replacement with appropriate provisions geared to the changed conditions of today.

At this point, it should be acknowledged that the Registry of Deeds has served this country well since its establishment in 1707. I also want to take this opportunity to thank the current Registrar of Deeds and the registry's staff for their work and commitment. Rather than replace the repealed statutes with equally detailed provisions, it is intended that the detailed registration and other formalities will be set out in general rules to be made under section 47. Where possible, the detailed provisions regarding deeds will correspond with those relating to the registration of title under the Registration of Title Act 1964. This will help the authority to ensure a coherent approach to the registration of both deeds and title.

Section 31 is a standard provision that contains definitions of terms used in this Part. It should be noted that the definition of deed includes a reference to information in electronic or non-legible form which is capable of conversion to legible form. This is included in order to permit the computerisation of records and other data.

Section 32 makes provision for a registry of deeds under the management and control of the property registration authority. Section 34 provides that a register of deeds, which may be in an electronic or other form capable of conversion into a permanent legible form, shall be maintained and that the form of this register shall be prescribed in general rules. Section 33 contains transitional provisions.

Section 35 provides that the application procedure, and the procedure by which registration is to be given effect, shall be prescribed in general rules. Section 36 changes the way in which applications for registration are to be recorded. In future, applications for registration will be allocated a serial number. Section 37 provides generally that the priority accorded to registered documents will be based on the serial number allocated under section 36. A deed which is not registered will continue to be void against a registered deed affecting the land concerned.

Section 38 is a technical provision which relates to memorials of deeds in cases where execution by grantees only is proved. The rectification of errors is provided for in section 39. The section is based on the corresponding section 32 of the 1964 Act. Section 40 deals with registration, or attempted registration, by means of a false deed.

While section 34 provides for the keeping of a register of deeds, section 41 relates to the retention of other records by the Registry of Deeds. It provides for the keeping of records such as indexes in a prescribed form, including by electronic means. Section 42 provides for searches of records kept by the Registry of Deeds, while section 43 deals with the inspection, search and examination of such records. Section 44 provides for judicial notice to be taken of certified copies of entries in the register etc., including reproductions of documents and records kept in electronic format.

Under existing legislation, the Registry of Deeds was required to maintain an index of lands. For whatever reason, this has not been done for almost 60 years. Section 45 deems the index to have closed on 31 December 1946. Section 46 deals with the closing of certain other records. The Registry of Deeds Act 1832 required that certain books be kept in parchment form. However, these books were not maintained during certain periods. The purpose of this provision is to deem the books to have been closed during the periods when they were not properly maintained.

Section 47 is a key section of the Bill. It provides for the making of general rules by the registration of deeds and title rules committee established under section 63. As I mentioned earlier, the keeping of registers, forms of application etc., is governed by the old statutes. It is necessary to replace this detailed legislation with a mechanism which will allow the Registry of Deeds to operate in a flexible and efficient manner. It is proposed, therefore, to give the registration of deeds and title rule committee the task of making general rules which will take the form of regulations under the Act. Section 48 is a transitional provision relating to the priority and registration of deeds registered prior to commencement of Part 3 or to deeds lodged for registration before such commencement.

Part 4 of the Bill contains a series of amendments of the Registration of Title Act 1964. These amendments are intended to clarify certain aspects of the law relating to the registration of title, to improve efficiencies within the Land Registry and to extend the registration of title system. In particular, they will provide the Land Registry with the means to develop and operate an e-conveyancing system.

Section 49 amends certain definitions in section 3 of the 1964 Act. In particular, it substitutes an amended definition of register and inserts a new definition of index in order to facilitate computerisation of records. Both definitions will contain references to material "kept in electronic or other non-legible form which is capable of being converted into a permanent form". It also provides for deletion of the definitions of "local office" and "local registrar" since the computerisation of registers will obviate the need to keep and maintain duplicates in local offices for inspection locally. In future, access to the registers will be available by electronic means.

Section 50 substitutes a new section 7 in the 1964 Act and provides that the Land Registry will be under the control and management of the property registration authority. Section 51 amends section 23 of the 1964 Act. It responds to a recommendation by the Law Reform Commission to exempt lands covered by the Irish Church Act 1869 from the compulsory registration provisions of the 1964 Act. Following its consideration of practical problems arising in this area, the commission concluded that what was required was a provision that would absolve non-compliant owners from the obligation to register. This is the purpose of paragraphs (a) and (b). These changes are in turn linked with the amendment in section 49 which deletes the reference to the Irish Church Act 1869 from the definition of the Land Purchase Acts.

Section 52 amends section 24 of the 1964 Act. It will permit extensions of compulsory registration, not only to specified geographical areas as at present, but also to specific categories of buildings or land. In addition, the Minister will be empowered to extend, by order, compulsory registration to dispositions other than sales or assignments of land. In short, the section provides the means of extending compulsory registration by means other than the geographical route set out in the 1964 Act.

Section 53 substitutes a new section for section 25 of the 1964 Act. It provides that in cases where compulsory registration applies, the person acquiring the interest in land must register the change of ownership within six months of such acquisition. Section 32 of the 1964 Act is amended by section 54. It will enable the authority to amend errors originating in the Land Registry where it is satisfied the error can be rectified without injustice to any party.

Increased use of digital maps will be important in the context of e-conveyancing and the Land Registry is undertaking a major project in this area. Section 55 substitutes a new section 84 in the 1964 Act which will allow the authority to use electronic or digitalised maps. Section 56 deals with the description and identification of registered lands and substitutes a new section for section 85 of the 1964 Act.

Section 90 of the 1964 Act is amended by section 57, which widens the powers conferred by it to include the granting of a lease, easement or profit À prendre in respect of property. The amendment also provides that the Minister for Agriculture and Food shall have powers previously conferred on the Land Commission.

The computerisation of registers, maps and indexes will of necessity require changes to the inspection and searches of registers and maps. Section 58 amends section 107 of the 1964 Act to allow for inspection of material in the form in which it is stored or in a legible reproduction of it.

Section 120 of the 1964 Act deals with compensation for error, fraud or forgery related to the Land Registry. Section 59 removes a reference in section 120 to the determination of a claim by the registrar, a matter that has been the subject of adverse comment by the courts.

The Law Reform Commission has stated section 123 of the 1964 Act does not appear to apply to the granting of appurtenant rights such as an easement or profit À prendre. The absence of these words of limitation would probably mean the easement or profit would last for the lifetime of the grantee only, which is obviously not the intention. This is remedied in section 60 which inserts three new subsections in section 123 of the 1964 Act.

Section 61 is a new provision which will permit judicial notice to be taken of certified copies of entries in registers etc., including reproductions of documents and records kept in electronic format. Section 62 amends section 126 of the 1964 Act to take account of the new registration of deeds and title rules committee. The intention is that this new committee, which will replace the registration of title rules committee established under section 73 of the Courts of Justice Act 1936, will make general rules relating to both for the Registry of Deeds and the Land Registry.

Part 5 deals with the new registration of deeds and title rules committee. Section 63 establishes the new committee to perform the functions assigned to it under sections 47 and 126 of the 1964 Act, while section 64 provides that it shall meet at least yearly and report to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.

Part 1 of the Schedule lists the enactments relating to the registration of deeds repealed by section 4. Part 2 contains a listing of provisions relating to registration of title also being repealed as a consequence of establishment of the property registration authority.

While it addresses a range of structural and technical issues, the Bill is enormously important in the overall context of the registration of ownership of land. I commend it to the House.

Gerard Murphy (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Fine Gael welcomes the introduction of this long overdue legislation. The review and reform of the systems of registration of title are badly needed. Land law, property law and conveyancing here are hugely complex and extremely archaic.

The Minister and his Department have been touting a major programme of reform of Irish land law and conveyancing law in conjunction with the Law Reform Commission. The Law Reform Commission, under Ms Justice Catherine McGuinness, is an agency of great integrity and achievement. It has an exemplary record of producing quality, thought-provoking and targeted documents that are invaluable to legislators and this Bill is no exception. The commission published a consultation paper on this subject just over a year ago and, as promised, published its report on reform and modernisation of land law and conveyancing law last July. The commission's consultation paper comprised a comprehensive review of all legislation in the area of land law and conveyancing, highlighting those statutes which should be repealed and suggesting how they might be replaced.

The programme of reform had three stated aims according to the Minister, namely, to simplify the law in this verbose area and to make it more easily understandable for both legal practitioners and the general public, to update the law in this area in the light of changes in social, demographic and economic needs and to make conveyancing easier and faster, thereby reducing the sometimes enormous costs that are associated with this legal service.

This last point is something that will strike a chord with many people, particularly young people who are trying to buy their first home or to move house. They are all too well acquainted with the many substantial costs associated with such a move, not least of which are solicitors' fees. Professional fees are measured on the recommended scale of 1% of the total price plus €100. The main outlays are stamp duty, Land Registry fees and fees for searches, but there is also normally a charge for miscellaneous outlays such as telephone, postage and photocopying.

Last year a conference was held at University College Dublin which examined the proposals put forward by the Law Reform Commission. This conference, entitled Modernising Irish Land Law and Conveyancing, also examined other areas of reform in Irish conveyancing practice, including the ongoing modernisation of the Land Registry and preparation for e-conveyancing. This Bill, therefore, is not so much ordinary legislation as a reforming statute that is the result of a long consultation process in which the considered input of many legal practitioners, academics and experts in this field were weighed.

Land is something to which there is great attachment in the Irish psyche. Following the Famine, the campaign for agrarian law reform became the focal point in Irish politics. The intensive campaigning of the Land League led to the passing of the Land Law (Ireland) Act 1881, which established the Land Commission and granted tenant farmers the three Fs — fair rent, freedom of sale and fixity of tenure. Subsequent Acts established land purchase schemes, whereby tenants could obtain long-term loans at reduced interest to purchase the freehold title to their land.

From the time of the evictions in the 18th and 19th centuries, when small Irish farmers tried to feed their families from indescribably small plots of grossly over-farmed land, through the Famine, to modern Ireland, where property seems impossibly expensive and is so far out of reach for so many people and so many young families, the Irish have retained a love of the land and a desire to own a small part of it. Today, Ireland has the highest rate of domestic owner-occupation in the European Union. It is right and proper, therefore, that we should take a strong interest in reform of this law and that we should make what efforts we can to make it as accessible and as legible as possible for ordinary, lay people.

To that end, I am sorry that not all the recommendations in the Law Reform Commission's report have been incorporated into the legislation. I hope the Minister sees this Bill as the first of many steps along the road. I understand there are to be other Bills arising from that report and that the Minister made a commitment in Seanad Éireann, on Second Stage of this Bill, that he would bring such Bills before the Oireachtas as are necessary to complete the reform process.

I particularly welcome the provisions in this Bill for e-conveyancing. As I said, the conveyancing process appears to be unduly costly. It is undoubtedly protracted and the evidence suggests it takes a great deal longer than it should or than it does in other countries in Europe. The one or two month process of buying a house in Ireland should and could be greatly reduced and I welcome any measures that bring new efficiencies to this process to bring it in line with our counterparts, particularly in this day and age of technology and instant monetary transfers.

Perhaps this is a throwback to the system established here under English law, an archaic and outdated structure based on feudal presumptions and tilted in favour of particular sections of society. Certainly, there is an imperative need to update such a system and to modernise it for the 21st century. Effective and efficient property registration systems and structures are essential requirements of a market economy. They are particularly important. Never in our history have we seen such a volume of land sales and expansion in all types of businesses, particularly the service sector. Capital for house and land purchases will always depend on a clear and good title being available as security for financial institutions.

Considering the massive increase in transactions in recent years, the Land Registry has been doing an excellent job, despite the fact the legislation it uses is totally out of sync with the capabilities of new technology. A World Bank report this year emphasised that doing business in the future will depend on every country having a quick and effective registration system. While Ireland was ranked 15th out of 145 countries surveyed, England was ranked seventh and is doing considerably better, despite the impressive information and communications technology advances made by the Registry of Deeds and the Land Registry in recent years.

It is easy to understand why the Land Registry received an award for its electronic services at the National Showcase and Public Service Excellence Awards. The annual report of the registry states that, despite a record intake of work, registry staff succeeded in boosting output to an unprecedented 206,000 cases, resulting in more than 333,000 registrations, thereby meeting current customer demand and reducing the backlog of cases. Unusually for a State body, the chief executive reported the document imaging project was completed on schedule and within budget. This project also contained elements relating to disaster recovery and business continuity, which are fundamental planks in the overall strategy and security of the system.

An indication of the success of the Land Registry access service is that almost 3,500 on-line business transactions are conducted daily and at least 80% of its customer base is using on-line facilities. Of the 769,000 electronic transactions availed of by customers, 86% were conducted instantly. This is in marked contrast to the old system under which service providers, county councils, health boards, solicitors, accountants and many businesses had to employ people on a permanent basis to visit the Land Registry offices daily where they manually struggled through the records with the assistance of staff. These new efficiencies have achieved a significant saving to the Exchequer. However, it is not clear whether these savings are being passed on to the consumer. Solicitors' offices are still the cornerstone of the registration of property and many are steeped in old fashioned traditions. They are aloof institutions which frustrate the will of ordinary citizens and small businesses. Such aloofness and tradition is used to confuse and justify unrealistic delays in solicitors' offices.

The Minister referred in the Seanad to the World Bank demanding an effective registration system to facilitate doing business effectively and efficiently. The progress of the Land Registry in recent years has been impressive but, for many individuals and small businesses, solicitors continue to slow the system through their outdated practices and unless the Minister deals with this logjam, improvements made by the registry and legislative changes will make little difference.

Solicitors should realise their very survival may depend on whether they modernise and become more responsible and accessible to a more demanding public. Many firms depend on conveyancing as a large element of their business. As the Land Registry becomes more effective in marketing its services on-line, legislation is amended to simplify transactions and more understandable, and consumers become more familiar with on-line transactions, there will not be as much demand for solicitors unless they modernise, change their attitude and realise that if they cannot provide a speedy and efficient service more professionally, consumers will work around them. If they continue as they are, the logjam in the registration system will remain at least in the short term.

I have come across instances where solicitors blamed the Land Registry for delays in registration, even though they were responsible. Members' facility to question the status of a transaction has exposed this problem on occasion. However, I refer to the major problem I have with this legislation. It provides that the Minister will not be accountable to the House. If a provision is not made in this regard, when we table parliamentary questions following the enactment of the legislation, we will receive a standard reply from the Ceann Comhairle's office stating the Minister has no responsibility for these matters. Parliamentary questions tabled to the Minister for Health and Children have been ruled out more frequently since the foundation of the Health Service Executive. At least under the old system the Minister forwarded the question to the chief executive of the relevant health board who would reply to the Member directly.

The Land Registry has made tremendous progress in computerisation in the past two years. The office will continue to make progress and, with the aid of legislative changes, it will become more efficient. I question the need in these circumstances to set up the property registration authority, a separate organisation that has no democratic accountability. The Minister correctly refused to set up a police authority, maintaining that the Minister of the day should be democratically accountable to the Dáil for policing matters, yet under this legislation he seeks to establish an independent registry of deeds even though the current body is doing an excellent job and is making major advances in providing all its services on-line. If anything, the office is well ahead of legislators and is awaiting legislation so that it can complete its task. If the Minister persists in this regard, he should incorporate into the Bill a system whereby the new registry of deeds will be obliged to answer Members' queries in the same way the Minister has done so effectively in the past. However, the Bill's objectives are welcome, although it is surprising it has taken so long to recognise that our registration system and laws are well out of date. We in Fine Gael will do everything to facilitate the passage of the Bill and other reforming legislation the Minister may introduce in this regard.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the Minister of State. As Deputy Gerard Murphy stated, the legislation, while long overdue, is welcome. I commend the Law Reform Commission on its work preparing consultation documents, reports and draft legislation in this area. The commission has pointed the way forward and made it simpler for legislators to go about their business in an informed, professional fashion.

The purpose of the legislation is to provide a statutory basis for the registration of titles and deeds on computers and for a digital mapping system in preparation for electronic conveyancing. The registration of deeds has been dealt with by the Registry of Deeds since 1707 while the registration of titles was under the remit of the Land Registry. These functions will transfer under a new system to the property registration authority. Deputy Murphy felt that this body would not be democratic but it is more appropriate to establish such an authority to carry out this work rather than leaving it in the hands of the Minister. The issue is how these bodies and authorities are made answerable to the Oireachtas. I agree with Deputy Murphy's point that if one asks the Minister a question about the operation of the authority which will now be in place, he will kick to touch and say the issue does not involve him but the authority. He will give no answer.

I hope we can operate as we currently do with the Land Registry and Registry of Deeds which fall within the Minister's remit. It is up to us to amend the legislation in the Oireachtas to ensure that when we go down the road of appointing regulatory bodies and authorities, the relevant Minister should be able to come to the House and answer for them. It is not good for democracy if, when we table questions, as we do on a regular basis, whether involving the Health Service Executive or any other authority, the Minister then claims to no longer have any responsibility in the area since the passing of the relevant legislation. If we are lucky, a question will be referred to the authority in question, but the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform does not even do this. If I table a question which involves the Prison Service, or the Courts Service, the Minister refuses to answer, says it is not his business and tells me to contact the prison or courts service directly. He will not even refer my question to the Prison Service or the Courts Service. The Minister is deliberately reneging on his responsibilities. If I table for his colleague, the Tánaiste and Minister for Health and Children, a question which involves the Health Service Executive, she will courteously and cordially say that the matter is no longer her area of responsibility and that she will transfer my question to the Health Service Executive for a direct reply to me.

Different Departments operate differently. I welcome this legislation but call on the Minister to ensure that if we are setting up another authority, as we are doing under this legislation, it contains its democratic element in terms of responsibility through the Minister to this House. The Minister of State might talk to the Minister and see what mechanism can be put in place to ensure this.

The legislation is timely, although we would like to have had it before us earlier. I have been looking at the Estimates for the Land Registry and the Registry of Deeds, which were published last week. It seems that whoever compiled the Estimates did not know anything about this legislation or did not expect it to be passed in the year 2006, and certainly not this year. There is no increase at all in salaries, wages and allowances for the Land Registry and Registry of Deeds. It is clear, therefore, that no extra staff will be recruited. All the solicitors and barristers on the authority being established, the property registration authority, will get nothing from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform because there is nothing in the kitty for them, nothing in the budget.

The Minister of State might indicate how this legislation will, if passed, be progressed, since there is no funding in place to progress it. There is not much sense in passing legislation, putting it on the shelf and then giving no funding to progress it. This will be expensive legislation. How will we compulsorily register all the land in the country currently not compulsorily registered unless there are employees and staff of the property registration authority registering it in every county? We can talk forever about e-conveyancing but if the land is not registered there is nothing with which to do e-conveyancing. That is the starting point. How can we get the land registered if we do not make provision for any extra staff? The authority will exist as a quango but will not exist in terms of doing the work. Unfortunately, this is reflective of much of the work of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. He is strong on rhetoric but weak on action when it comes to delivering.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

He tends to be like that.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

He does, and this legislation reflects that ministerial strength, but the strength of rhetoric rather than of delivery. However, I am not telling the full story regarding the Estimates for the Land Registry and Registry of Deeds because in the final item, under the heading of consultancy services, which — believe it or not — delivered €118,000 this year, an increase of €3,000, there is a new heading: "information society, electronic government, Land Registry external access service project". What is that? Is it the Registration of Deeds and Title Bill in electronic fashion? Presumably it is. That is the nearest interpretation we can put on it. However, there is no allocation of funds. There is a heading but there is no beef. Details are given at the bottom of the page, under the funding line: "A. From 2006, the ongoing costs associated with the Land Registry external access service project will be accommodated within the general administration sub-heads". In other words, whatever is above the line will cover the work this legislation will create. There is nothing new and no extra funds. As I said, there is not a single percentage increase for extra staff in the salaries, wages and allowances. There is a 68% increase for incidental expenses and for travel and subsistence. Office machinery gets a 19% increase but there is nothing for the work which will follow from this legislation.

In the amendment, section 57 of the legislation, provision is made for the Minister for Agriculture and Food to have all the powers which previously rested with the Land Commission. Right now we are dealing with the registration of property, its title and deeds. Is the Department of Agriculture and Food the appropriate Department to have that property in its ambit? If the Land Commission is now transferred in terms of its operation to the Department of Agriculture and Food, would it not be proper to have all property, in terms of the Land Registry, Registry of Deeds, which is now part and parcel of the new property registration authority, transferred to it? This has to do with land, farms, houses and property in general. Would the Department of Agriculture and Food be the appropriate Department?

It is a little difficult to see how some areas attach to the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. Child care is an obvious example because nobody can see where the justice element is involved, and it is not. It is just a historical anomaly that child care is attached to that Department for funding purposes, but in reality it is not the pertinent Department.

It might be more appropriate to have the Land Registry and Registry of Deeds in the first instance under the Department of "Agriculture and Land" or "Agriculture and Property" or something of that nature. The Minister might look at that issue.

In terms of what we are trying to do today, the report of the Law Reform Commission puts it quite well in its introduction:

The following principles were adopted in carrying out the project: first, updating the law so as to make it accord with changes in society; second, promoting simplification of the law and its language so as to render it more easily understood and accessible; third, promoting simplification of the conveyancing process, in particular the procedures involved, including the taking of security over land; fourth, facilitating extension of the registration of title system with a view to promoting a system of title by registration; and fifth, keeping in mind the overall aims of the e-conveyancing project and facilitating introduction of an e-conveyancing system as soon as possible.

That informed this tome as well as the consultation document that preceded it. It is a fine piece of work and full compliments must go to Mrs. Justice Catherine McGuinness, president of the Law Reform Commission, and all the staff who do Trojan work in the area of law reform.

The first question is why it took so long and why we have not done something about this issue already. When I was a member of Seanad five or six years ago, I recall dealing with the e-commerce legislation which was taken by the then Minister, Senator O'Rourke. The same arguments were used at the time as are being used today such as society was modernising, Ireland was lagging behind, and it was time Ireland put its commence in a mechanism with modern technology that would make it accessible in a broader scope on the domestic scene and internationally. That is even truer in terms of the conveyancing of land, registration of title and deeds, ease of access and cost.

Any of us who has bought a house, not to mention buying a farm, which is even more complicated, will be aware of the tortuous nature of acquiring title and the deeds to the house and the length of time it takes. The average time solicitors take to do this is 38 to 40 days with searches and so on. The consequent cost is often exaggerated because of the amount of searching required. Even if it is just the transfer of a title that has already been searched for, the same tortuous process must be gone through again. It is an overlapping process and it is redundant in terms of what needs to be done. We need a mechanism for certification that can be relied upon but every time there is a fresh transaction there is no need for every solicitor to search for titles with the Land Registry or the Registry of Deeds. It is an issue we should have dealt with long ago.

We are speaking about e-commerce, e-government, e-conveyancing and even e-mail. Yesterday we discussed the fact that within the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, not a single garda has an e-mail address, the basic form of e-governance. Nowadays one cannot contact one's local garda through e-mail. He or she cannot give one an e-mail address or a telephone number, unless he gives his own mobile phone number, because there is no proper system of telecommunications in the Garda Síochána. We are very much behind in this kind of area and the Estimates do not indicate an urgency in ensuring, once the legislation is put in place, that registration will take place effectively.

Good title to land and property is important in terms of ownership. Ease of access to getting that title and checking it is important for conducting business and in terms of cost. It is important for a country such as Ireland, which is a busy market economy, to be able to do the transaction in an accurate and speedy manner and to avoid, as far as possible, the legal fees, the various stamp duties and searches, all of which can be expensive.

I understand the time it takes to register a property here is 38 days — at least that is what is was last year — 21 days in the United Kingdom, 14 days in Finland and only five days in the Netherlands. That is a huge discrepancy in terms of efficiency and, no doubt, in costs. Obviously, the system in the Netherlands has been streamlined in such a way that it is easy to verify title and to have it transferred and registered. We are lagging behind in technology in terms of what we are doing.

The enactments to be repealed are contained in the Schedule to the Bill. They are an interesting combination of historical and social reflection from the Registration of Deeds Act (Ireland) 1707 which is being repealed. It is amazing that we are operating under an Act which is almost 300 years old in terms of the registration of deeds. How outdated that is.

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The rainbow coalition will do something about it.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The rainbow coalition will ensure funds are available to implement the legislation properly. The Deputy might be a part of it yet.

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have a dodgy seat.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that an offer?

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I was talking about the Independents.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy is on the right side. Deputy Rabbitte will promote him. He should keep that up.

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The door is always open.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The statutes go back to the Statute of Westminster 1285. Given that there are 150 pre-1922 statutes, it is great that we are at last getting around to repealing many of them. The codification of law and the repeal of pre-1922 statutes should be part and parcel of ongoing Government activity. This Bill has the effect of dealing with many of those statues. When one considers what has been covered in military and social history from the Flight of the Earls to the confiscation of the land, Tudor times, the acts of settlement, the Penal laws, land Acts, the burning down of the Customs House, the burning of the Four Courts and ground rents, the difficulty in establishing deeds and titles is colossal and can certainly be a tortuous and complicated process. A few problems arise as a result of this. Who will carry out the work of registration? Who will supervise it? Who will ensure there are no errors in the registration?

I understand when the genealogical records were being transcribed for computerisation purposes that it was an absolute disaster. Those who were employed were not au fait with the archaic and the arcane language one gets in genealogy. The texts were obviously complicated. Errors were manifest and manifold. We are talking about the most arcane and archaic language one is ever likely to come across. While the authority is established to carry out and supervise the work, how will it take place? From where will the skilled staff come to carry out this work? How are we to ensure mistakes similar to those made in the transposing of genealogical records for computerisation purposes will not be made? Who will check mistakes do not take place? It is a serious matter. Obviously, the paper trail will remain. However, once the register is computerised, who will go through the searches to double check? How will we ensure such errors in the most complicated deeds, documents and titles can be avoided?

In some cases there are no deeds or title. Dublin City Council has built on acres of land for which it has no title. As it cannot find deeds or title, it creates the title but it only creates it when a tenant decides to buy his or her home. Local authorities are sitting on portions of land. Many other portions have no title. The Minister knows all about the burning of the Four Courts and the Custom House as his family was involved.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

He is innocent.

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It was anti-social behaviour.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

His family predecessors had a hand in some of it too, even though I am sure he will not admit to this.

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy is upsetting Deputy Morgan.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy is making me jealous. I do not want to be upstaged.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Morgan did nothing like this in his time in the movement.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I bow to Deputy Costello's superior knowledge of the activities of the Minister and his heirs.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Antecedents.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

His predecessors. I do not know what his heirs will do.

What will we do with limbo cases where there is no title? How will they be computerised? What about cases where there have been verbal agreements? A lot of property is held in that fashion, for example, where it is passed from father to son. Written title and deeds are not easily available in such cases.

The biggest problem with this Bill is that it provides for compulsory registration of title. Only three counties have done this so far. While it was unfortunate it did not happen earlier, fair play to the Minister for making an order last September in respect of counties Longford, Roscommon and Westmeath. He probably found there was no title to a plot of land in Rooskey.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Land with a vista.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not know what sparked that off.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

He included the other counties to make it look good.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Through whatever perspicacity, the Minister determined no action had been taken for decades in the registration of land and that only counties Carlow, Laois and Meath had been registered. He decided to give us another three, Longford, Roscommon and Westmeath. This relates to compulsory registration. Apart from those counties, none of the remaining 20 has provided for registration, with the exception of occasional registration. A huge backlog of work remains to be done.

What is the situation regarding — I say it with Deputy Morgan present — the 32 counties? Six other counties are part of the whole country.

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We will no longer have a reference to the Six Counties; it will be the seven counties.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There are questions concerning land straddling the Border. We often hear of a certain gentleman who owns a farm on both sides of the Border.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Seán Garland.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

How will this appear in our computerised system? Has Northern Ireland engaged in this process ahead of us? Do those people with land on both sides of the Border have a computerised register of title for the land in the North but not for that in the South? These anomalies need to be reviewed. The major issue is to have all the land registered. The system cannot be computerised until it is registered. Before the Minister arrived, I pointed out that the Estimates for 2006 did not provide funding to deal with this new legislation, or to employ additional staff or services. It is hard to imagine anything happening next year without a Supplementary Estimate.

Why should church lands be exempt? I do not see why the church should be treated differently. While it could be argued that the Law Reform Commission recommended this course of action, the Minister has been known to step out of line with recommendations made to him. Why should we not have the same system for all land? Why should we allow one section to be non-compliant with compulsory registration? Do I see the Minister shaking his head indicating this has been changed? We might see an amendment to this effect.

This legislation is necessary. I will not say it is timely — we should have had it before now. Much work remains to be done before we reach the computer age in having the title and deeds registered in a fashion that will allow them to be computerised. We will also need a paper trail. We know the problem we have experienced with electronic voting and intoxalysers not having a paper trail. The documents will need to be carefully stored, indexed and accessible. I understand little work on the indexation of land records has been done. In the past 60 years not a single parcel of land has been indexed. We have had no indexation of any of the land and property that has changed hands in the past 60 years. That paper trail needs to be considered very carefully.

I welcome the legislation and the repeal of all the redundant, archaic statutes, mainly pre-1922 and some which were enacted since. I urge the Minister to provide funding in order that we can carry out the necessary work referred to in the legislation leading to a computerised system of deeds and title for all the lands in the country.

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to share time with Deputy Morgan.

Séamus Pattison (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the debate on the Registration of Deeds and Title Bill 2004, of which modernisation and efficiency are key parts. Land is very important in the psyche of the people. Our history is strongly connected with the land and steeped in it. This goes back to the time of the Land League and the rights of tenants. Some amazing historical figures such as Michael Davitt pursued that agenda. It is important to modernise the legislation because of our background and history. We should broaden the debate on these issues.

The matter is also relevant to what is happening in County Mayo and the Rossport five. I use this opportunity to commend them for representing the rights of small farmers and local tenants, as well as for their bravery and integrity in taking on the big international companies. It is important that we include this in the debate.

In dealing with this legislation, the rights of people and the issues of land and private property, it is essential that property never becomes more important than the people. Recent cases have given rise to hot and heavy debate, particularly in the Nally case, in this regard. People have the right to defend themselves and their property but they do not have a right to kill somebody on their property. I was amazed, shocked and horrified and I find it a disgrace that some weak-kneed politicians used this issue in their own personal and political interests.

I strongly support the rights of Travellers and challenge people in this House who have not shown leadership on this issue. I refer here to Mr. Jim Higgins, MEP, and Deputy Kehoe who said at a meeting in Bunclody last Thursday that he would have done exactly the same. Their comments were disgraceful and out of order. Property should never be more important than people and I challenge them on that. I raise this matter because it is important for all Deputies to show leadership on these issues. The Nally case was sad but the reality is that the person involved crossed the line. We must all accept that. Those of us who have been personally attacked over the years for defending the rights of Travellers know this. Many of us have often been in abusive and dangerous situations but we did not cross the line. It is important to highlight that fact. I commend Michael Collins and Pavee Point for showing leadership on this issue and for defending their interests.

Criminality is everywhere; it is in the Traveller community and in the settled community. Some 95% of complaints in my constituency about anti-social behaviour and crime relate to the settled community but we do not see that on RTE or in The Irish Times or Irish Independent. Let us face facts. We cannot condone or support criminality but neither should we label or brand a certain community for what is going on in society. I raise this matter because it is directly connected with the issue of land and property.

The explanatory memorandum to the Bill states:

The purpose of the Bill is to provide for the establishment of a body to be known as ... the Property Registration Authority . . . with the functions conferred on it by the Act. Its principal functions will be to control and manage the Land Registry and the Registry of Deeds and to promote and extend the registration of ownership of land. Part 2 of the Bill contains provisions relating to the establishment and operation of the Authority and to staffing and related matters.

It further states:

There are two separate systems of registration in relation to land in this country. The registration of deeds system, which is operated by the Registry of Deeds, provides for the registration of documents relating to land with a view to determine priorities between documents dealing with the same piece of land. There is no statutory requirement to register a document but failure to do so may result in a loss of priority. The effect of registration is generally to achieve priority over documents that have not been registered or have been registered later. However, registering a document does not in itself guarantee the title to land dealt with by that document.

The registration of title system — which is operated by the Land Registry — was introduced in this country in 1865 and was extended in 1891. [As we can see, the legislation is outdated.] It is now governed by the Registration of Title Act 1964. Unlike the Registry of Deeds, the Land Registry registers actual ownership of land.

It is important that we highlight this matter. Land ownership is an issue that has emerged in my constituency in the past two years. I refer to the crisis with regard to the property of those in Marino, Fairview and Santry where land has been confiscated to construct the Dublin Port tunnel. A total of 214 homes in my constituency were damaged as a result of the tunnelling and more than €1.5 million has been paid out in secret deals to residents as compensation, with nobody saying anything about it. There are major cracks and flooding issues with regard to the tunnel and people have contacted my office to inform me of these matters.

Another issue is the flooding of the Tolka as a result of 5 million litres of waste water being pumped into our beautiful river. This is a disgrace and I challenge the Minister for Transport and Minister of State on these issues. With regard to finance, the Dublin Port tunnel is €200 million over budget and people expect that it will now cost in the region of €1 billion. I raise these issues because they are directly connected to the debate about land.

Another important land issue in my constituency is Dublin Bay. The proposed infill of 52 acres should be highlighted. I will continue the tradition of Seán Dublin Bay Loftus in this House and oppose the 52 acre infill. There is much empty space in Dublin Port and we will not accept this. From the point of view of flooding, if these 52 acres are filled with concrete and more development, it will affect tides and we will have further flooding in Clontarf and Marino. The people of these areas will not accept this and I will defend their interests in the House, even if the other three Deputies who represent the constituency remain silent on the issue.

With regard to land, I am in favour of sensible planning and development, particularly around Dublin Port. I challenge Peter Bacon's recent report in which he discusses the development of the port. In economic terms, Dublin's productivity in handling containers is only 32% that of benchmarked EU container ports. Traffic congestion is a much greater constraint on Dublin's growth than port capacity. Surely, the way forward is increased port productivity and the diversion of port traffic from Dublin to satellite ports in the region. Let us have more regional development and end the congestion. Filling in 52 acres of Dublin Bay is not the solution. It also brings the added nightmare of flooding in Clontarf and Fairview. We need to preserve our bay and develop our ports and we need to give everybody a share of the cake. This makes economic and environmental sense.

The explanatory memorandum also states:

Section 60 responds to a 1998 recommendation of the Law Reform Commission by inserting three new subsections in section 123 of the 1964 Act. They are necessary because section 123 does not appear to apply to the granting of appurtenant rights such as an easement . . . The absence of these words of limitation would probably mean that the easement or profit would last for the lifetime of the grantee only.

I commend the Law Reform Commission, which pumps out reports and excellent proposals many times a year, on the excellent work and research it carries out.

With regard to financial implications, the memorandum states: "The proposals set out in this Bill are intended to streamline and modernise the operation of the Registry of Deeds and the Land Registry, in particular by preparing the way for introduction of and electronic conveyancing system." This is a key element of the legislation which tries to streamline and update the legislation in a common sense fashion. I welcome this important debate and the sensible proposals in the legislation.

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the Bill, which is a much needed step forward in addressing the needs of 21st century land conveyancing. I regret the introduction in the Bill of one of the most difficult words, "e-conveyancing", I have seen in the English language. It is awkward rather than difficult. I would prefer if we had done without it as it does not flow that well from the tongue.

We should be going further with this legislation. The Minister suggested that we be radical or redundant and, in that vein, I believe we should have mandatory registration of deeds within a particular timeframe and should include a sunset clause. In other words, I believe that every parcel of land in the State should be registered within, perhaps, a ten-year period. If it is not registered in that time, it should revert to the State.

Developers and others experience practical problems on a daily basis in trying to establish title in both inner city and rural areas. In the inner city, many developments are held up by the sheer difficulty of establishing very complex title. It can often take years to tie down who owns a small parcel of land. That small obstacle can hold up significant development. We should consider the introduction of some kind of legislation to ensure that all property is registered by a certain date. This is particularly necessary at a time when we are trying to encourage brownfield development. The docklands area and parts of the inner city which have been in decline for some time need to be developed. We need some kind of radical action to deal with such areas, where it can be difficult to ascertain the nature of the title.

This is also an issue in rural areas, particularly those which have suffered significant depopulation over the last 150 or 200 years. It can be quite difficult to trace the ownership of property if people have emigrated. This problem is found not only in agricultural areas but also in smaller towns and villages where it is not unknown for property to be derelict, under-used or vacant for many years. A great deal could be done to hasten the acquisition of such sites or to put in place some mechanism to enable them to be developed. The identification of the proper owners of lands under the Derelict Sites Acts has been a significant obstacle to the use of such lands. We are all familiar with sites in our constituencies and counties which have sat unused for many years, if not decades. Some kind of short sharp shock is needed if we are to make the best use of such assets. Local authorities, which own some such sites, do not have the best record in property acquisition or development. We need to make a radical change to the registration of title regulations if we are to make progress in this regard.

I am in favour of the introduction of electronic identification of and access to title. The Bill alludes to and provides for the significant amount of great work that is being done in this regard. In countries like Denmark, which offer their citizens a significant level of on-line access to information, it is practically possible to use to Internet to identify land holdings and to ascertain the name in which land is registered. I accept that there are privacy issues in this regard, but I do not think there would be any harm in establishing an easily accessible geographical information system that would allow any person to identify the real owner of any piece of land. Such a system would help us to deal with derelict and problematic sites which have been idle for many years. We could provide for a ten-year lead-in to the full operation of the system to allow people to resolve gently the many boundary disputes which exist. I do not suggest that such disputes can be resolved with a wave of one's hand, but the possibility of an information system being established would concentrate the minds of certain people. For example, it would put pressure on adjoining owners to sort out their property demarcation issues.

This discussion on matters relating to the registration of deeds and title gives us an opportunity to examine the rights of property owners, an issue that has been considered in some detail by the All-Party Committee on the Constitution. One of the difficulties with property rights in this country is that, to the best of my knowledge, they extend all the way to the centre of the earth. That leads to practical problems when land is being purchased and acquired to facilitate major infrastructural projects such as the Dublin Port tunnel and the rail interconnector. We need a practical definition of how far into the earth property rights extend. The problems I have mentioned could be resolved if it were known that such rights extend 10 m or 20 m down into the earth. Nobody would object to a demarcation of rights that would give people the right to have enough soil or earth under their houses to protect them from vibration and structural damage when tunnelling operations or other major infrastructural works take place.

We should not debate this Bill without mentioning the difficulties with commercial leases. The former Deputy, Mr. Alan Shatter — I was about to say the late Mr. Shatter, but he is very much alive and well — introduced a very good Bill relating to property leases. We need to expand on that legislation by making provision for the assignment of leases and updating the provisions relating to the time limits on leases. We should introduce legislation to remove the cobwebs in this regard and to make clear to people the rights they enjoy when they purchase property leases. The intractable issue of ground rent also deserves to be highlighted as part of this debate. Legislation is needed to prevent the continuation of ground rents by another name under the existing law and to clear up the problems which have existed in this regard since this State achieved independence.

We need to address the issue of the taxation of land. The Green Party has proposed a site value tax on land along the lines of similar taxes which have been implemented in other countries. The possibility of introducing such a tax, which has been discussed at great length, was alluded to in a report that was launched yesterday. It is not an easy bullet to bite but some measures need to be taken to provide for greater equity in taxation. I would welcome any move away from a tax on labour to a tax on real assets like land. I accept that the family home would be exempt from any such tax. There should be some kind of taxation on land that is zoned for development but has been lying undeveloped for many years. There should be some form of taxation on second homes. We should consider the possibility of introducing a site value tax for commercial property. Such a tax would concentrate the minds of property owners.

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This is music to my ears.

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thought it might be. The Minister seems to be constantly surprised by the similarities between the Green Party's policies and——

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am never surprised; I am always delighted.

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is good. Can I quote the Minister on that in the Green Party's election manifesto?

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Green Party wants to get them on the second homes.

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy should not worry.

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We need to consider seriously the introduction of a site value tax, perhaps commencing with land that is in an area that means it should be developed.

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Fine Gael will stop the Green Party from introducing such a measure.

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That might be the case. I was quite surprised by Fine Gael's quite vocal negative response to yesterday's announcement. It shows that the parties do not agree on all policy matters.

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Green Party will have its way when it is in Government with Fine Gael.

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It might.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This cross-chat between the Deputy and the Minister is music to my ears.

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is not music to the ears of the Deputy's party spokesperson.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I like to hear such ideas flowing from the leafy suburbs in the wealthier part of the stockbroker belt.

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is great to see legislation addressing the registration of land.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I want to share everything with the Deputies.

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish the Minister would live up to his stated preference for radicalism by introducing significant changes to release land for the right kind of development in the right places.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The orchestra has completed its performance, unfortunately for those on the Government benches. I will not say anything that will be music to the Minister's ears, unfortunately.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Perhaps there will be a clash of cymbals.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I agree with Deputy Cuffe's remarks about ground rent. The time when that issue should have been dealt with by successive Governments has long since passed, but it still needs to be grappled with. This country's system of land registration is outdated and inefficient. Although I welcome this Bill in so far as it goes, it is clear that it does not go far enough. The legislation before the House will not deliver the kind of reform and simplification that is necessary and long overdue. The Government has a duty to ensure that the State has an effective land registration system, which is needed by individuals and business.

This Bill updates the law on registration of deeds and ownership of land and provides a statutory basis for the electronic registration of deeds and title. It will modernise the system that is in place in the Land Registry. It will also modernise the Registry of Deeds, which is archaic at present. The current system places unnecessary financial and time burdens on people buying property, including the already financially stretched first-time home buyers. One could surmise this position has been allowed to persist because of the financial benefit of the system to the legal profession. When buying a house one must go through a solicitor who will then use the services of a law searcher to carry out the various searches that need to be done on the property and the people buying and-or selling it. These include property searches in the Land Registry and Registry of Deeds, judgment and bankruptcy searches in the High Court and sometimes planning searches in the local authority. These can be costly and if the sale does not go through straight away, they may have to be carried out again. For example, just because a judgment was not filed against a person on 1 May does not mean the sale can through on 5 May. Obviously, it is an inefficient system and the net result is that people buying and selling property end up spending extra money on solicitors' fees and unnecessary time on the process

There is a strong case which Sinn Féin would support — I am sure the Minister would be pleased to hear Sinn Féin could support him on any issue — for compulsory registration of property and the phasing out of the registration of deeds system in favour of a simplified system of land registry. While this would involve considerable work during the transition stage, it would pay off in the long term.

I note the Minister has spoken of the fact that his Department was involved in a joint project with the Law Reform Commission aimed at the modernising of conveyancing law which involved the publication of a consultation paper and consultation process. He indicated he would seek Government approval for proposals for future legislation in this area towards the end of the year. The Law Reform Commission's report on reform and modernisation of land law and conveyancing law was published in July and included a draft land and conveyancing Bill. When does the Minister expect this legislation to be published? The sooner the better it is brought before the Houses of the Oireachtas. Many of us would be of the view that the Minister would be much better deployed involving himself in this type of legitimate activity rather than much of the propagandising he does on issues well outside his portfolio.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

He would never do that.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Trying to malign Irish republicans, as he does on a daily basis, in an attempt to thwart the Irish freedom struggle will not deal with this type of issue, to which the Minister should apply himself.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is unfair of the Deputy to say that.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Thankfully, the Minister has been singularly unsuccessful in his endeavours to date because my party is continuing to grow.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is organic growth.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Perhaps that has been even helped by the activities of the Minister because sometimes it acts as a spur to encourage people to examine the situation on this island, to reflect and arrive at the conclusion that republicans are right after all. We need to deal with this issue once and for all, and the only people who are trying to deal with the Irish freedom struggle issue are——

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Coalition partners.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

——republicans. Therefore, I wish the Minister happy days.

I am pleased this legislation is designed to prepare the way for e-conveyancing, even though some people have a problem with that term. I look forward to the day when all this work can be done on-line cutting out the need for law searchers and, who knows, perhaps even the need for solicitors. This Bill is only a first step along that path. If the Minister would take seriously this part of his portfolio, it would be of great benefit to private individuals and businesses across this land. I look forward to the day when that will happen.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am pleased to speak on this Bill. The Minister's colleague said he was disappointed the Minister was not able to be here and I am glad he is here now. I wish to pick up on a number of points touched on by previous speakers. As an aside, I was impressed by the rapport between the representatives of the leafy suburbs on the south side who are enthusiastic in their welcome of any possibility of acquiring, appreciating and sharing the areas outside their remit. I never cease to be amazed by the middle class attitudes in areas where everything is curtailed within the curtilage of the homes in those areas, but the representatives of those areas are in agreement with the sharing of everything else with everybody else and preferably among themselves. I would love to share with those representatives all the leafy shades, the swimming pools and the high amenity areas the rest of us do not have in our areas. I look forward to the time when there will be a joint sharing of those amenities between us mere humble country folk and our betters in those leafy or silvan settings.

Much has been made of the modernisation of the system and I agree there is a need to modernise the registration system. Modern technology makes registration relatively easy. Through the use of the GPS an aerial satellite photograph can be scaled down to a 1:500 scale on a map. It is possible to zoom in on a photograph and bring the information on it down to a map scale. I mention that point in the context of when a boundary dispute arises in respect of a property, particularly in the case of a housing estate in a development area, all hell breaks loose. A large black or red line is drawn around the outer perimeter and it is impossible to establish the exact boundary. The information is imprecise and it gives rise to all kinds of difficulties. I am sure the Minister, in his legal capacity, must have dealt with countless cases requiring him to devote long hours to figuring out where the boundary might lie. Countless cases have ended up in courts and they have been resolved, although not necessarily to the satisfaction of either party.

Local authorities have transferred many of their deeds on to microfiche. The records are, to say the least, imprecise and unclear. Is there a back-up system? Deputy Costello also referred to this matter. It is a little like the electronic voting system in that often there is no paper record held, particularly in the case of local authorities. The lack of that back-up system is obvious when trying to find precise details in a case.

I wish to refer to one or two further points with which the Minister will be familiar given his legal knowledge. He referred to the ability of people to allow their properties to be remortgaged to finance the house purchase of junior members of the household. I do not know the reason for that reference. It is an admission by Government that the price of houses has gone beyond the reach of ordinary people and that some means must be found to deal with the matter, as for example in a case where the property concerned was not registered or whatever the case may be. I fail to understand the necessity to make that reference unless it was by way of an admission of failure to provide, in a realistic way, for the housing needs of the next generation.

The registration of lands held in common can give rise to difficulty. A technique that used to be employed, particularly by developers who seem to know how to handle the system, was that they would approach a number of tenants with tenancy rights in common and acquire them by one means or another and eventually they could register their property. I am not certain of the degree to which consultation takes place with those who might have such an interest. I refer to a scenario whereby all the people in this Chamber would have an interest, by way of family relationship, in a property or properties held in common in terms of tenancies or a commonage. A particular individual could acquire a property held in common by virtue of moving from one tenant to another so as to eke out an agreement. Eventually, if he or she isolated a sufficient number of the tenancies, he or she would be able to make a move to register the entire property. That has happened, with scant reference to the extended family members of the tenants. Perhaps the Minister would examine the matter in the context of this modernisation, which I agree should take place.

The Minister referred to lending and burdens on titles. He has had his own experience with planning permission down the country similar to what we humble citizens have to deal with every day. It is a common occurrence for some smart guy somewhere to decide to put a burden on somebody's property by way of section 37 of the planning Act which sterilises the property in terms of future residential use. It is totally illegal. It is up to the local authority, as the planning authority, to grant or refuse planning permission at some stage in the future, which it might have to do, and not be precluded from so doing by some smart alec who has decided to stick a burden on a property registered against the title. This obviously devalues the property but, funnily enough, if it is zoned or acquired by material contravention at a later stage, the sterilisation no longer applies. The sad thing is that this poor clown who owns a few acres of bogland or other propoerty, who might well have a need to realise some of his or her assets would have great difficulty getting planning permission if there was an objector. In such situations, as we all know, objectors do appear, very conveniently for themselves in many cases, although I fully recognise the right of a person to object for genuine reasons.

Local authorities do not have any right to place such a burden on the title because they have other mechanisms to ensure the control and development of properties at any time. Some local authorities impose burdens, while others do not. Why should some people be disadvantaged by virtue of somebody having the right and power to ruin a property for future development purposes? This is unfair situation and although no money has changed hands and nobody, especially the local authority, has lent any money or offered it to the unfortunate landowner or house owner, the burden applied has the same effect as if a loan had been drawn down on the property. If a person wanted to apply for planning permission 20 or 30 years later, the local authority would have discretion and could overlook the sterilisation of the property. It can still follow that he or she could get permission if it was not registered as a burden on the title, as it is not registered in every case.

Somebody with extra time on his or her hands makes a decision to register these burdens. In the event of an objection, it guarantees that, by virtue of their being such a burden on a title, a person cannot develop a site for future residential purposes, although his or her next door neighbour who might have secured similar planning permission with no registration of burden on the title — for no other reason than he or she was lucky — can do what he or she wishes with a site in accordance with the law. It has been said by many involved in the planning sector that there is no necessity to do this at all, that it is a matter for local authorities to grant or refuse planning permission without reference to anybody else and that they would be doing so within the law, whereas they are breaching this part of the legislation by doing what they want.

A number of speakers referred to the number of unregistered properties. The Derelict Sites Act did work. It worked if there was a will but I could never understand the reason there was such a reluctance to implement it.

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is amazing.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am aware of several properties that were left idle for years, on which somebody from the local authority had placed derelict site notices. When I first became a member of a local authority, which was not today or yesterday, there was such a sign on a building in my local area for several years. Innocent that I was, I inquired for how long more the plaque would remain on the wall. I was told it had been in place for some years. I replied that the building was falling down, that there was a risk that part of it could fall out onto the road or that somebody could be injured or killed and that there would be a major claim against the local authority which had powers under the Derelict Sites Act. Lo and behold, the property was acquired. There was no difficulty in doing so once there was the will to do it. I do not know why there has been such a reluctance to enforce the provisions of the Act.

Property has become very expensive in this and other cities, as well as towns. It is hugely expensive, especially if there is development potential. The Derelict Sites Act could and should be used more effectively and efficiently and at a much earlier stage to acquire properties fairly that fall within its remit. I can think of a few around this city that might well fall within its terms. A previous speaker, whose ideological bent I would not necessarily support, referred to a property with zoned land that had remained derelict for 20 years and said something should be done about it. It is always beneficial for planning permissions to have a lifespan. They are supposed to be granted for a specified term. Zoning is also supposed to have a lifespan, with which I also agree.

The difficulty with which we are faced is that the economy is based on property prices — wrongly and very dangerously. We have low interest rates. Obviously, people want to hold on to whatever property they have, be it buildings or plots of land. This even applies to tunnels, the only exception being the one that leaks water. People wish to hold on to property because it is a safer bet than financial institutions or other speculative ventures. While this happens, there is a dearth of property available for development purposes. I could go on for hours on this subject but the Leas-Cheann Comhairle will be glad to hear I will not do so. There is merit in what my colleague proposed——

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Does the Deputy think there is any merit in a site value tax to which the speaker referred?

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The value of property generally and the economy should not necessarily be decided in Ballybrit. Some other means should be found. It is extremely dangerous to have an economy based on property values. Higher wages, benchmarking and all such things grew from the fact that people were no longer able to buy a house. That came about in a variety of ways. I heard an opinion expressed that 100% loans were an invention of recent times. They were not. Such loans have been given during the past ten years. In many cases 100% loans were given on properties that had appreciated in value by 100% during the previous year. That is where the problem arose and it will cause much more serious problems. It is the reason major industries consider relocating to lower wage economies and the occurrence of the present problems in Irish Ferries. Many businesses are deeply concerned about the costs imposed upon them which derive directly from high property values.

The economy should not be based on high property values. It is an extremely dangerous and precarious position to hold. When or if a bump or crunch comes, everybody will feel the draught quickly and the financial institutions will be the first to feel it. I hope they do not repossess left, right and centre given that they caused the problem in the first instance. That is enough ideology.

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy did not speak about the site value tax yet.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I was thinking about going down to the Shannon and looking at sites there. I will see what it is like there before we have a site value tax. Much benefit could arise from such a tax but we must examine it closely. A person or a family might own a plot of land of three, four or five acres, which might be valuable. A plot of land measuring 100 sq. m. would be extremely valuable. That person should not be penalised for disposing of it. The man in the tent in Ballybrit should not be the person to capitalise from it. Unfortunately, that is what happens. Many people who disposed of property found its value dramatically appreciated as soon as it left his or her ownership. That is peculiar to this country.

I would like to take the time to discuss many aspects of the legislation again. I would like to entertain the Minister and I am sure he would love to entertain me. I hope the property registration authority is effective. It is another quango and I am sick of them. Every time I come into this house to speak on a Bill, another quango has been formed. The Minister will not be able to answer questions. One almost has to get a screwdriver to get information about the Courts Service by way of parliamentary question. The degree to which accountability extends to this House is decreasing with every passing day.

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

More blather has arrived.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As the Minister invented it, he should know all about it. Each passing day and night that he performs as he traverses between television and radio stations, he is overly occupied and overburdened with the degree of blather in which he indulges on a daily basis. I am surprised the Minister does not have the international franchise for it.

The Minister of State also said "it is necessary to be able to demonstrate good title to sell or transfer the land". Many of us are aware of instances of peculiarly registered title. In some cases members of the legal profession were involved in registering that title. It is appalling that situation should have happened, but it has. People a few generations from now will have to pick up the threads again.

In defence of the legal profession, a few years ago I dealt with a case where title was unsafe, the property was never registered and 170 years had passed since a will was made. It was great fun and I am sure the Minister would have relished it. A young newly qualified solicitor tackled it, and she had the title registered and everything in order after six months. The solicitor went to Australia afterwards. I do not know if it was in disgust after going through the title search, but she did an excellent job and left the property with clear and precise title.

I mentioned quangos and lack of accountability to the House and I will finish on that point. Hardly a day passes without a new quango. The Department of Health and Children is a disgrace with no accountability. This Bill introduces another quango and I am sure we will have more of them. I know the Minister personally agrees with me. We are elected to this House and accountable to the public. All the institutions created by this House should be accountable through a Minister——

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is why there is no Garda authority.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I considered that. I agree with it. It is not party policy. Nobody wants to be accountable and everybody rushes away from responsibility. If someone is asked to make a decision, let him or her do so, do his or her best and not run away from it. I ask the Minister not to create any more quangos and to examine the GPS system. It would create clearer maps to the benefit of everyone seeking to register property.

Tom Hayes (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak briefly on this legislation. I am delighted the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform is present to listen to some of the issues raised.

Before I speak on the legislation, the Minister mentioned the Garda authority. I welcome it and fair play to the Minister for his stance on it. I wish to bring to his attention as Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform a matter I witnessed in my constituency last Tuesday. During recent weeks non-nationals have come to one town in particular where women run shops on their own. The Minister must address this issue.

Séamus Pattison (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That has nothing to do with the legislation.

Tom Hayes (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I know. I will get on to it. I just want to take the opportunity to make this point.

Séamus Pattison (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy must get on to it. He cannot have——

Tom Hayes (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will speak to the Minister on it in greater detail at some other time. I feel strongly about it.

Some people must deal with registration of title more than once or twice in their lifetime. Many people register their house or land. I inherited a family farm and one of the matters that most frustrated me was the length of time it took to go through the registration process and transfer the land from father to son. If this Bill and computerisation help to change that, then they are welcome.

Many land owners are frustrated because they must wait for such a long time. We all attend constituency clinics regularly. Solicitors approach their clients who in turn approach us to speed up the process of title registration. At times, when we make a representation through a parliamentary question, it comes through rapidly and I acknowledge that. However, it is not good enough that people must involve politicians to speed up a normal procedure for which they pay large amounts to solicitors. If this Bill puts something in place to deal with that, it is welcome.