Margaret Cox (Fianna Fail)

It will not reintroduce it. However, if I can pay €500 for a second holiday in the year, I will not mind paying €5 or €10 at Dublin Airport if I feel the tax is being well spent.

I would like to take this opportunity to share with the Minister of State some of the issues that are being raised with me on a daily basis. First, I would like to focus on stamp duty. Last year, the Government abolished stamp duty for first-time buyers of second-hand houses which cost up to €317,500. I suggest to the Minister of State and the Government that we should remove stamp duty on family homes or first homes. If an investor buys an investment property, that person should pay more tax. If one is lucky enough to be able to afford a €1 million family home, it is good because if one is working hard and making the money, one should be entitled to spend it. If it is a family home, it should not be subject to stamp duty. Abolishing this tax would protect families and young first-time buyers.

I would make no apology for increasing stamp duty on investment property. If one can afford to buy a second house, one should be able to pay the relevant tax. All I ask is that the family, first-time buyers, single people and young married couples who want to buy their first home are exempt from stamp duty.

I have no doubt that officials in the Department of Finance will be able to work out what this initiative would cost. According to the Permanent TSB-ESRI house price index, the cost of houses for first-time buyers is increasing at almost twice the rate experienced by second-time buyers. The price of houses for first-time buyers increased by 9.4% for the first nine months of this year. If we remove this false level of €317,500, there will be no increase in prices. When this figure was announced, first-time house prices increased from €250,000 to €260,000 and €270,000, and now it is practically impossible to buy a house for €317,500. This was a false inflation. If stamp duty is abolished, there will not be false inflation, and people will pay for the real value of the house rather than inflated prices as a result of stamp duty.

Senator Dardis's motion refers to the high rates paid under our fine welfare system. I would like to refer to maternity benefits. Paid maternity benefit has now been increased to a maximum of €249. If the maximum amount is not increased, I would like to see the payment extended. A plan should be put in place whereby paid maternity benefit is extended from 18 to 20 weeks, to 24 weeks and then to 26 weeks, even if it is increased by two weeks a year. By the end of 2010, people who have a baby should be paid maternity benefit for a minimum of 26 weeks.

In parallel with this, the issue of parental leave should be addressed. The Parental Leave (Amendment) Bill was debated in the Dáil last week. Parental leave is being amended so that one can take a minimum of six weeks of the 14 weeks unpaid parental leave. As in the case of carer's benefit and maternity benefit, parental leave should be capped at a small amount for six weeks to begin with. If children and the family are the core of our Constitution, we should be protecting them during the most important and vulnerable time in their lives. We should deal with the issue of child care during the first year of a child's life. I would like to put down a marker in regard to maternity leave and parental leave.

I would also like to refer to the environment for businesses, to which Senator Feighan referred. I was disappointed to hear him say he feels like telling people who say to him that they are thinking of setting up their own business that they should get a comfortable pensionable job in a local authority, the health service or whatever. I do not believe this is the Ireland of the future. We must continue to foster entrepreneurship by creating and maintaining the proper environment for all those involved in the economy.

I read with horror recent reports in The Irish Times regarding proposals to increase corporation tax from 12.5% to a possible 17.5%. I have no knowledge of this — perhaps the Labour Party is considering it. I am the owner and manager of a small business. I was involved in running a business in this country when corporation tax was over 50%. One had to work hard to make money, employ people, pay 65% in tax as a PAYE worker and then pay 50% to the Government on the profit. This will not work in the future. While corporation tax on manufacturing and foreign investment was increased from 10% to 12.5%, other taxes decreased. This is why I as a business person, or as an individual working in this State, have no difficulty paying tax at a rate of 12.5%.

I also have no difficulty paying indirect taxation, which is not stealth tax. At least I can now choose how I spend my money. I can choose whether to spend it on holidays, insurance or whatever, because I have a job and I am contributing. I do not mind working hard. People who run small businesses must work very hard. They make many sacrifices in their family and business life. They may not have 20 or 25 days holidays in a year like people who work in the public sector. They work very hard and pay a fair share of tax at 12.5%. I do not agree with the suggestion that we should increase corporation tax from 12.5% to 17.5%. That would ruin whatever economic gains we have made in this country over the past ten or 15 years.

We have moved away from a 50% tax rate. What did this prove? People were not happy to pay 50% tax. Those were the days of the cheats, when people made up stories and pretended they did not make that much money. Is this what we want to return to?