Maurice Cummins (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I take pleasure in seconding the Bill and compliment my colleague, Senator Coghlan, on bringing it before the House. Too often, we hear Senators complain about the decline of town centres and cities and suggest means of revitalising them. This small Bill could go some way towards addressing the current imbalance. A glaring inequity in the law governing the imposition of commercial rates is negatively impacting on the vitality and viability of towns and cities and conferring a competitive advantage on out-of-town retailers. If left unchecked, this inequity will continue to contribute to the erosion of the social, economic and community functions performed by town centres and the creation of dereliction, urban decay and the associated costs this imposes on wider society.

Most major town centres have faced the imposition by local authorities of paid parking. Parking income has become a significant part of local authority budgets. The advent of paid parking in town centres has also forced retailers with parking spaces in these areas to impose charges for parking on their properties as a means of preventing people from occupying car park spaces to avoid town centre parking charges.

By contrast, we have experienced a major expansion in edge-of-town and out-of-town shopping facilities, which depend almost entirely on car-based customers. Planning and transport policies afford priority to the town centres rather than out-of-town retailing on the grounds of sustainability and the social and economic functions of town centres. However, the legal basis for the levying of rates by local authorities runs in the opposite direction. Under current legislation, a retailer who does not charge for parking is not liable for rates in respect of car parking spaces. Typically, it is only where a retailer charges for parking that parking spaces are subject to rates.

The existence of free parking in out-of-town retail outlets acts as a distinct draw away from town centres for car-based customers because they would be otherwise obliged to pay for car parking and face fines or, in some cases, clamping if they exceed the paid period. The consequent impacts are self-evident. A decline in the level of trade impacts on the viability and vitality of town centres. Reduced customer footfall in town centres impacts on the viability of retailers, particularly those which are trading in convenience goods and depend on the higher levels of low-spend customers for continued viability. Fewer viable retailers means fewer viable town centres. The increased dereliction and urban decay which may result bring with them additional societal costs that are often borne by government and taxpayers.

Reduced footfall also impacts negatively on local authority revenue streams through reduced parking receipts and, ultimately, reduced rate yields from town centre businesses that fail. This reduction in revenue is not replaced by alternative revenue streams from out-of-town retail centres. Ultimately, the current position leads to the conferral of enhanced power on the out-of-town and edge-of-town retailers, reduced choice and opportunity for consumers and a deterioration in retail diversity. It is also the case that many out-of-town retailers operate low cost and low employment models such that the current position militates against the creation of new employment.

I commend the Bill to the House. Senator Paul Coghlan has given us much food for thought. The Valuation Bill is due to come before the House shortly. This legislation could form part of our considerations of how to assist town centres that have been hit hard by the recession in recent years to remain viable and add vitality to them.