Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I acknowledge motorways that were built. I acknowledge many things. I acknowledge LIHAF. I regularly and often said good things about this Government, the Minister of State, in particular, and other Ministers in his Department when they did things right. I am pointing out that people think when they write a cheque or set up a direct debit for €850 that Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown is €850 better off. It is not. It is €50 better off. That is the point I am making and it is valid. The figures are not mine; they are figures that were substantiated and verified by the head of finance in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown. That is the only point I am making. I will acknowledge LIHAF, the Luas, the M50 and many developments when the current Government was not in power and when Fianna Fáil was in government. Very expensive projects were carried out all over Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown. They included schools. When some people say we blew the boom, they should realise a lot of the boom was not blown. Certain things did not work out and moneys were certainly wasted but there are schools, community centres, swimming pools and libraries all over Dublin and the rest of the country that were built when the money was available to build them by the Fianna Fáil Government and, subsequently, the current Government.

Senator Craughwell referred to the living-in-Dublin allowance. That is not the point of this debate but it should be acknowledged that people in expensive properties in Dublin are spending considerable amounts of their disposable income, or their income, on mortgage payments, which means they have an awful lot less to do everything else with at the end of a week than somebody in a different part of the country. We need to acknowledge that.

My background is in accountancy and I am a prudent person. I am not recommending that one gets rid of €500 million worth of property tax. Equally, however, I do not believe it is fair on anyone in any part of the country to see a doubling of his or her property tax. Therefore, I ask that the Government withdraw its amendment. I ask the Minister of State to support the motion. If in order to pass the motion he really wants me to take out the line about Irish Water, because the percentage is wrong, I probably would live with that.

The motions calls on the Government to undertake significant reform. It says it is doing this anyway. The motion calls on the Government to ensure households do not receive substantial increases in the absence of reform. The Minister of State said that he does not want to see such increases. The motion asks the Government to examine the possibility of extending some relief from the local property tax to those in multi-unit developments paying significant management charges. I am not saying they should not pay anything but asking that there be some acknowledgment that some of the services being paid for through management companies are services that other people would get normally. I accept the fact that people buy into managed estates knowing the position.

We talk about ability to pay. Half the Minister of State's opening speech referred to ability to pay, and he said it was accounted for, and then he said in his wrap-up speech that, as with motor tax, it is not accounted for, so that makes it okay. There is a little inconsistency there. I ask the Government to withdraw its amendment. I do not want to divide the House. It is a reasonable motion. It is not asking that anything be deleted or replaced. It is now in the hands of the Minister of State.