David Norris (Independent)

I commend my colleagues in the Labour Party for tabling this recommendation. It illustrates how seriously Seanad Éireann is taking the Bill. I can imagine no other reason for sitting on a Saturday, if we did not take it seriously. This is a well thought out recommendation which I am happy to support. However, I have a minor reservation which is that one month might be a little short. While I support the principle very strongly and I am happy to second the recommendation, I will be happy to listen to what the Minister has to say on the subject of whether this could practically be done. One thing we really need in this country right now is prudent supervision of the economy. This is an instrument that would allow us to do this. It is very important we provide for it for that reason.

We should not be ideological about tax reliefs, although I am not suggesting for one minute that Senator White is being ideological about the recommendation. I am here long enough to remember tax reliefs being introduced for various matters such as trying to ensure the redevelopment of deprived areas of the inner city. These are socially constructive because they will lead to investment by the private market in areas of deprivation. However, they need to be examined to see if they are working and ensure they are not being massaged by clever accountants in order to do things that the Legislature did not intend them to do. While we need to be sensitive to these matters and not be ideological, we need to make sure they are not being abused.

We are here on a Saturday to try to pass a finance Bill that contains many difficult measures that will cause pain for the people. When discussions were taking place about how the Bill would be approached, the Minister claimed that there were immense logistical difficulties, yet it seems to have been done. One thing that worries me is that the Minister indicated that if the Bill was rushed through, it might leave scope for very clever accountants to come in and find methods of engaging in legal tax evasion. That is another point that needs to be borne in mind.

The recommendation refers to tax forgone. I am also interested in the question of tax yields. I know that is a projection and the Department of Finance has had a difficulty in the past in making accurate predictions. Sometimes it was too miserly in its predictions. During the boom years I remember the surprise expressed when its predictions had been extraordinarily exceeded, but it has also got it wrong the other way around. A degree of information on this would be helpful. Forecasts can only be made in looking at tax yields and we simply would not know in one month, but the principle of prudent governance comes into play. In order to be able to budget we need to know the likely tax yield from these various measures.

I am very glad that the question of job creation has been put before the House in the first recommendation. That is absolutely essential. We know that there are many very encouraging positive signs within the economy and it is important that we celebrate them. On the other hand, it is not a full victory if we have increased statistics for exports, various subtle yields for the IFSC and so on but still leave 440,000 people unemployed. That indicates we are dealing with an economy, not a society.

My final point-----