Alex White (Labour)

It ought to have been a three month period and I would be satisfied to concede an amendment if the Minister wished to bring it forward to the effect that it should be done in three months rather than one.

I wish to make some other points briefly. I believe I am entitled to do so since I moved the recommendation. This goes to the heart of our politics and how we debate these things. Naturally, many people have availed of reliefs who are not wealthy property developers, including nurses and the lower earners to which Senator Mooney referred. That is an important point to which we must be sensitive. We must realise that people could end up having their income greatly reduced and the State must take a view on how that must be done. I understand and appreciate that. I admit that people have come to me about it as well. That is not the point. What do we want to do in terms of how we structure our taxation system? How do we use the taxation system in limited ways to promote economic growth? The whole community must participate in this debate. The fact that people would be affected by a change is naturally hurtful and potentially damaging to them.

I hate the phrase "back to basics" but we must go back to the start and hold an intelligent public debate about these schemes and expenditures. The way in which we facilitate this is simply by having the information available and having an expert assessment and an intelligent scepticism applied to every scheme proposed. I welcome the Minister's remarks on the two schemes he identified in the Bill. It should be in legislation and not simply on the instruction of a Minister that an analysis would be published about a particular relief. It should be in legislation that this is the way we do business. There should always be a cost benefit analysis available to the public such that it can participate in the debate, however limited it might be given the technicalities. At least the public would have some participation in the debate such that everyone has a stake in what is being done on their behalf in respect of the taxation system.

Senator Walsh should note that this is not about the Labour Party looking to try to extract more taxes. This is about trying to ensure that, generally speaking, people pay their taxes and we limit the opportunities for people not to pay tax. Let us face it: that is what a tax expenditure scheme is. It amounts to not having to pay tax that one would have to pay otherwise. If there is a public dividend, whether it affects houses along the Shannon, in inner cities or seaside houses, it should be balanced against the relief. A decision must be made on it for the common good rather than reducing the debate to the undoubted hardship that affects individuals when faced with the reduction or removal of some of these schemes.