Joe O'Toole (Independent)

I welcome the Minister to the House and I also welcome this important Bill. I wish to raise the question of the level of involvement of lawyers in the process. I have examined the positions which have evolved in other European countries. Under the French system, the registration or transfer or conveyancing is performed by one particular solicitor. The notaire is usually appointed by the State and is required to ensure that the vendor is the owner of the property, that the property is compliant with the appropriate planning legislation and that there are no encumbrances or title demands on it by virtue of previous relationships such as marriage, divorce or children. The notaire establishes these facts as far as the vendor is concerned. The notaire also establishes that the person buying the property, who is to become the new registered owner, is in a position to do so. If a mortgage is involved, the notaire establishes whether the person has received a mortgage or has the wherewithal to buy it. After assessing all these questions, the notaire then brings notice of the intending sale, transfer or conveyancing to the attention of the appropriate local authority. One solicitor effectively acts as an honest broker and represents the state in the sense of ensuring that the transaction is carried out appropriately; that in all situations the people involved in the transaction are the ones who are entitled to be involved in it and that the transaction complies in every way with planning laws and any other legislation. The notaire is also responsible for bringing the fact that the transaction has taken place to the attention of the appropriate taxation and other state authorities.

The French system is a very appropriate way of dealing with property transactions. It does not prevent either party to the transaction from also engaging his or her own solicitor but the notaire system means that he or she is not required to engage a solicitor and the state has oversight over the transaction and ensures that it happens correctly. Introducing the same system in Ireland would dramatically reduce the inconveniences of transactions.

Under the French system there are also time limits on all these matters. For example, before registration, a pre-agreement and an agreement must be reached and there is a cooling off period after the initial agreement to engage in the transaction, which I think must be confirmed 11 or 15 days later and cannot be agreed before this period. The legalities of the conveyancing must be concluded within nine weeks of the second date. That introduces an element of certainty into the process. People always worry about such matters as whether the conveyancing has taken place or whether the deeds are lying around in the solicitor's office.

I do not know if it is appropriate to mention this matter with regard to this debate but some European countries have a maximum amount as regards the cost of a sale. The total cost of State tax, land tax or stamp duty plus the cost of agents and legal fees cannot exceed a certain percentage of the price. In some countries, the figure is approximately 9%. Again, this provision brings an element of certainty and security to those involved in the transaction and is a welcome element. These issues should be taken on board and perhaps spelled out in more detail.

The Taoiseach made a comment in the Dáil approximately 18 months ago when the cost of houses, land and development land and the difficulty of getting access to development were being discussed. He stated that he believed that the vast bulk of potential development land around Dublin was owned by a small number of people; I think he mentioned a figure of eight or nine. I was stunned by his statement and it confirmed what many people had been saying. I met him privately later on and asked him how he came by that figure. He said that the information he had led him to that conclusion.

The problem to which the Taoiseach referred is one encountered by many of us when we try to address this issue. It also emerged during the various tribunals. Whereas land registration must take place legally, the question of options over the purchase of land is not recorded or registered anywhere. I have only skimmed through the Bill but I do not think this aspect is covered. The sale of options on the purchase of land should be recorded. The lack of data on the sale of options over the purchase of land is the reason why a number of shady developers have purchased options on the purchase of land in many parts of the country. I know of people who have sold options over the purchase of their land, yet there is no record of it.

Similarly, people sign legal agreements to transfer, sell or change the ownership of property registered under one person's name while that person simultaneously signs another document agreeing to transfer that land at a future time to another named person whose name does not appear on any titles anywhere. This is why tracing ownership became so difficult in some of the tribunals. The question of options and agreement on land sale should be recorded, perhaps through a solicitor or agency. We need to address this issue some time in the future.

Apart from that, I welcome the Bill, which considerably loosens up things and should be welcomed by people on all sides. I ask the Minister to consider some of the points I have raised.