Seanad debates

Wednesday, 1 July 2009

Local Government (Charges) Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

 

8:00 pm

Photo of Pearse DohertyPearse Doherty (Sinn Fein)

I refer to Senator Coffey's point, which was expanded upon by Senator Burke. I was unfortunate to miss about 45 minutes of the earlier discussion. Amendment No. 6b that I proposed dealt with the granny flat issue. It can be made exempt. We are all happy that if the flat is part of an existing dwelling it will not come under the charge and we should not muddy waters by talking about that case. We are discussing a self-contained flat which adjoins a residential property with both properties owned by the same person.

I commend the Minister on the Bill but what he is doing in this regard is very wrong. Many people build granny flats onto their house for different reasons, one being that they can provide care at close proximity for their dependent parents so that there is no need for them to go into a home. That saves the State a great deal of money. Another reason concerns isolation in rural areas where people do not want to live out in the countryside on their own and wish to feel protected.

The State is now going to penalise a son or daughter financially for building a place for their mother or father in their later years. That is unacceptable. Sometimes when we are dealing with legislation we speak of line 22 and all the rest of it but we need to think about real-life experiences. We need to talk about the son and daughter whose mother and father live in a rural isolated area in an old house in which they have lived all their lives. They decide to build a granny flat onto their house and the mother and father leave their house to move into the granny flat, on which there will be a levy of €200. The house they left will also have a levy of €200 every year because of a decision made by the son or daughter. It was their right decision to build a wee extension to the house, a self-contained unit to help their parents get through the later and final years of their life in close proximity to the son and daughter and grandchildren.

I commended the Minister on this Bill but it was not supposed to be about penalising our elderly people or their sons and daughters who build granny flats for them. It was supposed to be about those who had enough wealth to accrue second properties or rental properties throughout this city and in other areas and who used the water and sewerage services of the local authority and did not pay their fair share. The old person or the son or daughter who dug into their own pockets to extend their house should not come under the terms of this Bill. I plead with the Minister at this late hour on Committee Stage to consider this matter once again. It can be made exempt. There may be difficulties and perhaps my wording or that of other Senators was wrong.

I believe we are coming at this in the right spirit. I shall raise the issue outside this Chamber although I do not want to do so because I have been seeking this Bill for a long time. It is very close to being ready. Other concerns were raised that I do not share but this issue is fundamental. The Minister is sending out the wrong signal. We are talking about 4,000 properties - only a handful - but this will go to the core in communities throughout rural Ireland. I am sure it happens in cities too although I am not familiar with that situation. In rural Ireland it is a major issue and should not arise in this legislation.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.